Skip to main content

Full text of "National Workshop on Bus-Wheelchair Accessibility"

See other formats


UMTA-IT06-0322-87 



U.S. Department 
of Transportation 

Urban Mass 

Transportation 

Administrafion 



National Workshop on 
Bus-Wheelchair Accessibility 

Guideline Specifications for 

Active Wheelchair Lifts 
Passive Wheelchair Lifts 
Wheelchair Ramps 
Wheelchair Securement Devices 



Office of Technical Assistance 

Office of Bus and Paratransit Systems 



iVlay 7-9, 1986 




v., ■4.9**'; -.ttj:*..--' 



National Workshop on 
Bus-Wheeichair Accessibility 



Guideline Specifications for 
Active Wheelchair Lifts 



May 7-9, 1986 
Seattle, Washington 

Prepared by 

Battelle Columbus Division 
505 King Avenue 
Columbus, Ohio 43201 
and 

ATE Management & Service Co. 
1911 Fort Myer Drive 
Arlington, Virginia 22209 

Prepared for 

Office of Bus and Paratransit Systems 
Urban Mass Transportation Administration 
Washington, D.C. 20590 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



These guideline specifications are the culmination of maty hours of fiard work 
by persons representing all facets of the accessible trar;sit and paratransit 
industry. The Urban K.ass Transportation Administration (UMTA) recognized that 
the technology associated with accessible transportation could be improved 
and sponsored an Advisory Panel in order to develop industry guideline specifi- 
cations. Representing different viewpoints and different interests, the members 
of the Advisory Panel met, discussed issues, and developed these guideline 
specifications. It is a credit to the Advisory Panel and the dedication of 
its members tha ; a fornal vote never had to be taken and that the guideline 
specifications /ere developed on the basis of consensus. 

Several people eed to be acknowledged for the assistance they provided to 
the Advisory Pa -el in the development of these guidelines. George I. Izumi , 
the UMTA Projec Manager, was responsible for planning and organizing the 
Advisory Panel, planning for the Workshop, and contributed greatly to the 
development of he guiJelines. Vincent R. DeMarco, the UMTA Program Manager, 
was responsible for guiding the efforts of the Advisory Panel and for planning 
and conducting he Wor'.shop. Two other persons from the U.S. Department of 
Transportation clso provided assistance. Christina Chang of the Transportation 
Systems (lenter lelped co organize and run the Workshop and prepare Workshof 
Proceedings. S( ott Yo ^k of the National Highway Traffic Safety Admi ni stral i cn 
participated in the Advisory Panel meetings and assisted in clarifying certain 
safety issues. The Ba;:telle project team of Gerald A. Francis (consultant), 
Martin Gombert ATE Management and Service Company, Inc.), Rolland D. King, 
and Davie M. Noi Strom was responsible for developing the draft guideline 
specifications end serving as a technical resource to the Advisory Panel. 
Special recognin'on is given to Mr. Norstrom who skillfully managed the 
guideline deveUpment process and led the discussions of the Advisory Panel 
meetings that ottained a general consensus of the Advisory Panel on each 
Cjjideline subject. Finally, appreciation goes to each member of the Advise -y 
Panel who gave (f their time and contributed their expertise to the develop nent 
of these industry guidelines. 



PREFACE 



On September 17, 1985, the Administrator, Ralph L. Stanley, of the Urban Mass 
Transportation Administration called together a meeting with representatives 
of transit agencies, handicapped organizations, rehabilitation specialists 
and manufacturers of buses and wheelchair lifts to hear first hand the problems 
and issues regarding transit bus wheelchair accessibility. As a result of 
this meeting, the Administrator requested that an UMTA Advisory Panel be formed 
to plan a National Bus Wheelchair Accessibility Workshop and to guide the 
development of a set of guideline specifications for the equipment required 
for transit bus and paratransit vehicle wheelchair accessibility. A contract 
was issued to Battelle to assist UMTA in this effort. 

As a result of surveying the transit industry for input and meeting with the 
Advisory Panel, Battelle prepared a draft set of guideline specifications for 
Wheelchair lifts, securement devices and ramps for presentation and discussion 
at the National Btis Wheelchair Accessibility Workshop held in Seattle, 
Washington, on May 7 through 9, 1986. Using the inputs developed during the 
Workshop and the written comments submitted following the Workshop, the 
Advisory Panel prepared these final guideline specifications. 

These guideline specifications are advisory in nature. The intention of the 
guideline specifications is to provide transit agencies with a model that they 
rould use, as appropriate, in the development of their specifications for 
wheelchair accessibility. In the guideline specifications, where the word 
"should" is used, the recommendation of the Advisory Panel is that the 
suggested item or value be included in a general specification. Where the 
word "may" is used, the Advisory Panel recommends that the item or choice of 
values be considered for inclusion based upon local operating conditions. 
The Advisory Panel has developed these guidelines for use throughout the United 
States. It recognizes that unique local conditions could make an item suggested 
f"'" inclusion inappropriate and a local public transportation provider would 
be required to make the appropriate changes (e.g. to accommodate extreme 
eivi ronmental conditions). 

This guideline specification is one of four specifications developed by the 
Advisory Panel, which developed separate guideline specifications for passive 
wheelchair lifts (those used primarily on transit buses), active wheelchair 
lifts (those used primarily on paratransit vehicles), ramps and securement 
cevices. Members of the Advisory Panel participated actively in the develop- 
ment of each individual guideline specification based upon their experience 
and interest. Although the Advisory Panel discussec many related accessibility 
issues, these guideline specifications focus only on the technical requirements 
cr a specific piece of equipment. They have been prepared to assist in the 
purchase of such equipment either separately or as part of an overall vehicle 
procurement. 



ADVISORY PANn 



The following individuals participated in the Advisory Panel for the 
development of the draft guideline specifications of passive wheelchair lifts, 
active wheelchair lifts, ramps, and wheelchair securement devices. 

Mr. Tom Bonnell, The Braun Corporation, Winamac, Indiana 

Mr. James Burton, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, Washington 

Mr. Dennis Cannon, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 
Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Richard Daubert, Collins Special Products, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Ms. Mary Lou Daily, Metropolitan Boston Transit Authority, Boston, 
Massachusetts 

Mr. James El ekes. New Jersey Transit, Maplewood, New Jersey 

Ms. Pat Flinchbaugh, York Transportation Club, York, Pennsylvania 

Mr. Robert Garside, Regional Transportation District, Denver, Colorado 

Mr. Howard Hall, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, 
Cal ifornic. 

Mr. William Henderson, Senior Services of Snohomish County, Everett, 
Washington 

Mr. Greg R. Hill, General Motors Corporation, Pontiac, Michigan 

Mr. Steve Holmstrom, Aeroquip Corporation, Jackson, Michigan 

^r. William Jensen, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento 
Cal ifornia 

Mr. R. Philip Jones, Everest and Jennings, Camarillo, California 

Ms. Denise Karuth, Governor's Commission on Accessible Transportation, Boston, 
Massachusetts 

Mr. Paul Kaufman, New Jersey Transit, Maplewood, New Jersey 

Mr. Frank Kirshner, Southern California Rapid Transit District, Los Angeles, 
Cal ifornit 

Mr, John Kordalski, Veterans Administration, Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Kike Kurtz, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 
Washington, D.C. 

Ms. J&n Little, Invacare Corporation, Elyrie., Ohio 

Ms. Fran Lowder, METRO Citizen's Advisory Committee, Arlington. Virginia 
Mr. Jeff Mark, General Motors Corporation, Pontiac, Michigan 

i V 



Mr. Keith McDowell, American Seating, Grand Rapids, Michigan 

Mr. Donald Meachain, Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, Ohio 

Mr. Austin Morris, Environmental Equipment Corporation, San Leandro, 
California 

Mr. Rod Nash, Collins Industries, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Charles Neal, General Motors Corporation, Pontiac, Michigan 

Mr. James Nolin, Champion Bus Company, Imlay City, Michigan 

Ms. Sandra Perkins, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 
Washington, D.C. 

Mr. James Reaume, Q-Straint, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada 

Mr. Joe Reyes, Southern California Rapid Transit District, Los Angeles, 
Cal ifornia 

Mr. Larry Sams, Mobile Technology Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Donald Smith, Li ft-U- Incorporated, Kent, Washington 

Dr. David Thomas, Transportation Management Associates, Fort Worth, Texas 

Mr. Lance Watt, The Flxible Corporation, Delaware, Ohio 

Mr. Vic Willems, Mobile Technology Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Chuck Stephens, Li ft-U- Incorporated, Kent, Washington 



V 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Paae 

1.0 GENERAL 1 

1.1 Scope 1 

1.2 Definitions 1 

1.3 Abbreviations 3 

1.4 Reference Documents 4 

2.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 5 

2.1 General Requirements 5 

2.2 Platform 9 

2.3 Structural 17 

2.4 Mechanical and Hydraulic 19 

2.5 Control Systems 21 

3.0 TESTING, CERTIFICATION, INSPECTION, AND WARRANTIES 26 

3.1 Design Tests 26 

3.2 Acceptance Test or Inspection (Optional) 32 

3.3 Installation Certification 33 

3.4 Warranty 33 

4.0 MAINTENANCE, TRAINING, AND SERVICE 33 

4.1 Documents 33 

4.2 Maintenance and Inspection 33 

4.3 Maintenance Accessibility 34 

4.4 Training (Optional) 34 

4.5 Service 34 

vi 



1.0 GENERAL 



1.1 Scope 

These guideline specifications relate to active lifts that are used by 
handicapped individuals to assist in boarding public transportation vehicles. 
An active lift is defined as a lift that when stowed may interfere with the 
use of the vehicle entrance in which the lift is located. As a result, active 
lifts usually have an entrance door separate from the regular passenger door. 
These guideline specifications have been developed with special concern for 
the safety of passengers using a lift and reliability of lift operations. 



1.2 Definitions 

The following definitions apply for this document. 

Accessible Vehicle - A vehicle that has been equipped to allow boarding 
by passengers who by reason of handicap are physically unable to board a 
vehicle that has not been so equipped. 

Active Lift - An active lift is one that when stowed may interfere with 
the use of the vehicle entrance where the lift is located and that when 
being raised or lowered operates primarily outside the body of the 
vehicle. 

Arc Lift - This term denotes the type of lift that has an arcing m^otion 
during operation as differentiated from elevator lift. 

Automatic Lift - This tenn refers to an active lift that has powered up» 
down, fold, and unfold functions. 

dBA - This tenn denotes decibels with reference to 0.0002 microbar as 
measured on the "A" scale. 

De:iqn Load - The maximum weight capacity a lift is designed to raise or 
1 ov/er . 

Drifting - The unintended movement of a lift from a stowed position. 

Elevator Lift - This term denotes the type of lift that has a vertical up 
and down movement as differentiated from an arc lift. 

Factor of Safety (Design Safety Factor) - The factor of safety is the 
ultimate strength of a material divided by the working stress. A struc- 
ture fails or breaks when loaded to its ultimate strength. A structure 
deforms or takes set when loaded to its yield strength. 

Fail-safe - A characteristic of a system and its elemenis whereby any 
malfunctions affecting safety will cause the system to revert to a known 
safe state. 



Fold - The term designating the operation of lift from an operating 
position to a stowed position on the vehicle. 

Interlock - The arrangement in which the operation or position of one 
mechanism automatically allows or prevents the operation of another. 

Lift or Wheelchair Lift - A level change device used to assist those with 
limited mobility in the use of transit and paratransit services. The 
term lift and wheelchair lift are used interchangeably in this document. 

Maintenance Personnel Skill Levels - Maintenance personnel skills used in 
this document are defined in accordance with the White Book specifica- 
tions as follows: 

5M: Specialist Mechanic or Class A M-ichanic Leader 

4M: Journeyman or Class A Mechanic 

3M: Service Mechanic or Class B Ser> Iceman 

2M: Mechanic Helper or Coach Servicentan 

IM: Cleaner, Fueler, Oiler, Hostler, or Shifter. 

May - This term is to be construed as permissive. 

Mechanical and Hydraulic Components - Mechanical and hydraulic components 
include all parts of the lift drive or control system that are subject to 
wear and degradation due to the operation of the lift. 

Paratransit Operation - Paratransit operation refers to a public trans- 
portation operation (service, vehicles, facilities, etc.) that is not a 
transit operation. 

Passive Lift - A passive lift is one that when stowed allows the unim- 
peded use of the vehicle door in which the lift is located. 

Pinching Point - A location where two closely spaced parts of machinery 
Can move together to create a human hazard. 

Semi -Automatic Lift - This term refers to an active lift that has powered 
up and down functions and requires manual operation for folding and 
unfolding the lift. 

Shear Area - A hazardous condition or location where a moving part 
approaches or crosses a fixed part. 

Should - The term is to be construed as recommended by the Advisory 
Panel . 

Slip Resistant - A characteristic of a surface of a material thet reduces 
unintended relative motion with respect to another surface with which it 
has contact. 

Structural Elements - The structural elements of the wheelchair lift 
include those that support working loads and attach the lift to the 



vehicle. They do not include mechanical and hydraulic components associ- 
ated with operation and control of the lift. 



Transit Operation - Transit operation refers to a public transportation 
operation (service, vehicles, facilities, etc.) that operates with fixed 
routes and fixed schedules. 

Unfold - The term designating the operation of a lift from a stowed posi- 
tion on the vehicle to an operating position. 

White Book -This term is the common name for "Baseline Advance Design 
Transit Coach Specif ications » " originally published by UKTA on April 4, 
1977. It is now available from the American Public Transit Association. 

Wheelchair - A seating arrangement that is positioned on wheels, may be 
powered or unpowered, and can be used to assist mobility limited 
individuals. 

Wheelchair Securement De . .ce - A device anchored to a vehicle and used to 
limit the movement of a wheelchair when the vehicle is in motion. 



Abbreviations 

The fonowing abbreviations may be found in the guidelines. 



AKSI - 


— American National Standards Institute 


ASHE - 


— American Society of Mechanical Engineers 


ASTM - 


~ American Society for Testing and Materials 


CSA - 


— Canadian Standards Association 


FMEA - 


~ Failure Modes and Effect Analysis 


FMVSS - 


— Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 


NHTSA - 


— National Highway' Traffic Safety Administration 


SAE - 


— Society of Automotive Engineers 


SCRTD - 


— Southern California Rapid Transit District 


UFAS - 


— UnifoHF Federal Accessibility Standards 


UKTA - 


— Urban Mass Transportation Administration 


VA 


— Veterans Administration 



4 



1.4 Reference Documents 

(1) American National Standards Institute 
1430 Broadway. New York, N.Y. 10018 

ANSI A17-1983 

Elevator and Escalator Conmittee Interpretations 

ANSI/ASME A17. 1-1984 

Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators 

ANSI A90. 1-1976 

Safety Standards for Manlifts 

(2) American Public Transit Association. "Baseline Advanced Design 
Transit Coach Specifications," includes Addendums 1 through 20 that 
were made to the April 1977 issue of the "Baseline Advanced Design 
Transit Coach Specifications," published by Urban Mass Transporta- 
tion Administration. (Contnonly known as The White Book.) American 
Public Transit Association. April 1983. 

(3) Baumeister, Theodore, Aval lone, Eugene A., and Baumeister, Theodore 
(III). Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, Eighth 
Edition . New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 1978. 

(4) California Administrative Code, Title 13, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4, 
Article 15. Wheelchair Lifts. 

(5) Canadian Standards Association. "Motor Vehicles for the Transpor- 
tation of Physically Disabled Persons," CAH3-D409-M84. Ontario, 
Canada: Rexdale. April 1984. 

(6) Canyon Research Group, Inc. "A Requirements Analysis Document for 
Transit Vehicle Wheelchair Lift Devices." Prepared for Urban Mass 
Transportation Administration, Westlake Villace, California. June 
1978. 

(7) "Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard," Code of Federal Regula- 
tions , Title 49, Part 571 No. 207. Seating Systems, and No. 210,' 
Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. 

(8) Henderson, William H., Dabney, Raymond L., and Thomas, David D. 
Passenger Assistance Techniques: A Training Manual For Vehicle 
Operators of Systems Transporting the Elderly and Handicapped, 
Third Edition . Fort Worth, Texas: Transportation Management Asso- 
ciates. 1984. 

(9) James, D. I. "A Broader Look At Pedestrian Friction." Rubber 
Chemistry and Technology , Volume 53, Pages 512-541. 

(10) Panero, Julius and Zelnik, Martin. Human Dimensions and Interior 
Space . New York: Whitney Library of Design. 1979. 



5 



Soc ety of Automotive Engineers. Standards, Recommended Practices, 
Infcrmation Reports. 

Stevart, Carl F. and Reinl, Herbert G. "Safety Guidelines for 
Wheelchair Lifts on Public Transit Vehicles." Prepared for Urban 
Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA-CA-06-0098-80-1 ) . 
California Department of Transportation. July 1, 1980. 

"Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards." Federal Register 
(49 FR 315i'8). August 7. 1984. 

"Veterans Administration Wheelchair Lift Systems: VA Standard 
Design and Test Criteria for Safety and Quality of Automatic Wheel- 
chair Lift System for Passenger Motor Vehicles." Federal Register 
(43 FR 213S0). May 17, 1978. 



2.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 



2.1 General Requirements 

The wheelchair lift should meet the technical requirements given in Sec- 
tion 2.0. 



2-1-1 Operating Environment 

The lift should operate in the temperature range of -10 F to 115 F, 
at relative humidities between 5 percent and 100 percent, and at alti- 
tudes up to 5,000 feet above sea level. Degradation of performance due 
to atmospheric conditions should be minimized at temperatures below 
-10 F, above 115 F, or at altitudes above 5,000 feet. 

Special procedures, hydraulic fluids, and/or lubricants may be used 
to operate the lift for the low and/or high temperature operating 
conditions. 

Rationale: The urban areas of the United States have broad ranges of 
climatic conditions. Weather data indicate that many cities have 
recorded 100 days or more per year of over 90 F temperatures. Likewise, 
many have recorded 20 or more days per year below 0 F. The annual rain- 
fall ranges as high as 60 inches per year to a low of 4 inches per year. 
The normal snow and sleet precipitation in some cities reach 88 inches 
per year. The recommended guidelines cover a broad range of conditions 
found in the United States and are adapted from the White Book 
specifications. 



(11) 
(12) 

(13) 
(14) 



6 



2.1.2 Weight 

The weight of the lift should not adversely affect the legal axle 
loadings, the maneuverability, structural integrity, or the safe opera- 
tion of the vehicle in which it is installed. 

Rationale: For legal and safety reasons the weight of the lift should 
not adversely affect the vehicle. Since existing lifts reportedly meet 
these requirements, the weights of existing lifts a^-e considered accept- 
able. The recommended upper limits are 1,000 pounds for lifts installed 
on standard transit vehicles and 400 pounds on small vans and other 
vehicl es . 



2.1.3 Operation Constraints 

2.1.3-1 The lift should operate when the bus is on level ground and 
up to road grades up to seven (7) percent or four (4)' 
degrees. 

2.1.3.2 The lift should operate when the bus is on level ground and 
when the bus is at dn angle of plus or minus 8.7 percent or 
five (5) degrees due to road crowns, depressions, or curb 
geographies. 

Rationale: A lift will operate in a variety of different topographical 
conditions and must do so safely and reliably. A balance neecs to be 
made between the topographical conditions to be dccommodated by lift 
design and the conditions where a lift will noi be required to operate. 

A seven percent grade specification is current '^y used by Seattle 
Metro in its lift procurement. Since Seattle has a relatively hilly 
topography, using its limit for road grade seemed reasonable. 

No specification reviewed during the development of these guideV'nes 
identified any requirements in terms of the roll of the bus. However, 
th^- VA sets a limit of 9 degrees in any direction for the operation of a 
powered wheelchair. Since a lift can tilt up to 3 degrees (Section 
2.2.5), the 5 degree parameter was chosen in order to be below the 9 
degree figure when the 3 degree tilt is considered. 



2.1.4 Boarding Direction 

A lift should be capable of handling a wheelchair in both an outward 
and inward facing position on the lift. 

Rationale: To accommodate the passenger and for emergency or other spe- 
cial conditions, the lift needs to be able to accept and operate w'th a 
wheelchair facing either inward or outward. Discussion by the Advisory 
Panel considered outward facing to oe oreferred, but both directions need 



7 



to be accommodated. Local operating policies may designate outward 
facing. 

2.1.5 Location of Lift 

The lift should be installed on the side of the vehicle opposite the 
driver's seat (recommended) or at the rear of the vehicle. 

Rationale: An active lift usually requires a separate entry. For safety 
reasons the preferred location is the curb side of a vehicle. However, 
in some cases a rear entrance may be preferred (e.g., in order to better 
utilize interior space). A rear entrance was not recommended, by the 
Advisory Panel although they recognized that special situations exist. 
If a rear door lift is used, vehicle loadings and unloadings should occur 
at off-street locations. 



2.1.6 Padding and Protective Covering 

2.1.6.1 Pinching movements, shear areas, or places where clothing 
or other objects could be caught or damaged should be 
covered or in other ways protected to prevent passenger 
injury when lift is in operation. 

2.1.6.2 All exposed edges or other hazardous protrusions on the 
wheelchair lift or on the bus in an area associated with 
the wheelchair lift or securement device (except the plat- 
form) should be padded with energy absorbing material to 
minimize injury in normal use and in case of accident. 

Rationale: To ensure safer operations all potentially hazardous areas 
should be protected. This is especially true of lift operations where 
individuals with certain handicaps have limited control and/or feelings 
in parts of their body and may not sense a hazardous condition. When a 
hazardous area cannot be adequately protected, the lift manufacturer must 
use other means to ensure safety. One recommended alternative is a pres- 
sure sensing device that would automatically stop lift movement if an 
OLject were detected. 

Tests have shown that edges and protrusions can be especially haz- 
ardous in accident situations. To reduce the potential danger, energy 
absorbing material should be used to protect these areas. The stowed 
platform should be protected on its edges. The Advisory Panel discussed 
having protection for the platform surface. When stowed the platform 
surface becomes a secondary "wall" inside the vehicle. A removable pad 
would provide additional protection, but was considered optional. Cali- 
fornia requires the pad but some states prohibit the pad because it 
reduces the field of vision. 



8 



2.1.7 Operation Counter (Optional) 

The lift should have an operations or use counter that records each 
complete up and down cycle of the lift. 

Rationale: A counter would provide data on lift use. The data would be 
especially useful in recording lift cycling, scheduling maintenance, and 
evaluating the performance of the lifts. The Advisory Panel considered 
this feature useful, but not required. Although a counter adds cost to 
the purchase price, the expense is considered to be offset by better 
maintenance and lower operating costs resulting from the use of the 
counter. 



2.1.8 Power Source Interface 

2.1.8.1 The lift should operate and meet all requirements of these 
guideline specifications while using the power sources on 
the transit vehicle. 

2.1.8.2 For small transit and paratransit vehicles, wheelchair 
lifts may be powered by a heavy-duty alternator system or a 
dual battery system with batteries similar to that supplied 
by the manufacturer of the vehicle. 

2.1.8.3 The lift should meet the requirements of these guideline 
specifications whenever the power sources are performing 
within their specified ranges. The lift should remain in a 
safe state during and following power source transients, 
including failure, that may be experienced on transit 
vehicles. 

Rationale: The electrical interface between the vehicle and the lift is 
an important consideration in performance. This gu-^deline is intended to 
ensure both proper interface consideration for normal operations and safe 
conditions in abnormal situations, including power source excursions and 
power failure. A heavy duty alternator or separate battery is recommended 
for small vehicles lo provide for more reliable operations. While the 
requirement for safe lift operations during and following power source 
transients may be somewhat redundant with ether sections of the guide- 
lines, it serves to emphasize the importance of continued safe lift oper- 
ations even during and fol "owing such power excursions. 



2.1.9 Wheelchairs To Be Accommodated (Optional) 

The contractor should identify the length, width, and height of the 
wheelchairs that can be accommodated by the lift. 

Rationale: Platform lize will limit the d^'mensions of wheelchairs that 
can use the lift. The coniractor should indicate the characteristics of 
wheelchairs that can use the lift in order for the lift purcnaser to 
understand clearly the limitations of the lift. 



9 



2.2 Platform 



2.2.1 Dimensions 

2.2.1.1 The lift platform should have a minimum clear width of 

30 inches. It is desired to have a minimum clear width of 
32 inches. 

2.2.1.2 The minimum clear length of the lift platform as measured 
between the outer barrier and the inner edge or roll stop 
should be 40 inches. At a length two and one half inches 
above the platform, the clear length should be 44 inches. 
It is desired to have a clear length of 44 inches at plat- 
form level and 48 inches, two and one half inches above the 
surface. 

2.2.1.3 The minimum height of the door opening at the wheelchair 
lift should be 56 inches. 

Rationale: The VA lift specification is a 29 inch width; and it iden- 
tified current platform widths of 26 to 40 inches with an average width 
of 32 inches. The VA length specification is 44 inches. The Canadian 
Standard Association specifies dimensions of 30 and 38 inches. However, 
these are just platform dimensions and do not correspond to the size of 
wheelchairs that can be accommodated. 

Estimates of current wheelchair sizes were obtained from two manu- 
facturers and more detailed information was found in a 1978 report, "A 
Requirements Analysis Document for Transit Vehicle Wheelchair Devices." 
The data are summarized in the following table: 



Estimate of Wheelchair Dimensions 

1986 1977 



Invacare Everest & Jennings Everest & Jenninqs(^) 



Percenti le 


Length 


Width 


Length 


Width 


Length 


Width 


100/99 


48 


30 


77-1/2(2) 


28- 


1/2 


47 




31- 


7/8 


95 






52/47-1/2(3) 


26- 


1/2 


43- 


1/2 


26- 


1/4 


90 


44 


26 




26- 


1/2 


42- 


1/2 


26- 


1/4 


85 












42 




25- 


1/4 


80 


44 


24 

















(1) "A Requirements Analysis Document for Transit Vehicle Wheelchair Lift 
Devices," Canyon Research Group, Inc., June 1978. 

(2) 77-1/2 inches represents a partially reclined, recliner wheelchair. 

(3) 52 inches represents a recliner wheelchair and 47-1/2 inches represents a 
regular wheelchair. 



10 



The dimensions of the lift are influenced by vehicle characteris- 
tics. For example, on small vans the ceiling height can limit platform 
length. Also, standard door openings on small vehicles can limit plat- 
form widths. Increased door openings are a possibility, but this could 
reduce the number of seats in a vehicle and increase vehicle cost. 

The dimensions of wheelchairs, existing specifications, and poten- 
tial vehicle limitations were all considered in the development of the 
platform size specifications. The minimum size requirements will accom- 
modate 90 to 95 percent of the wheelchair population; and the desired 
sizes will accommodate 99 percent of the wheelchair population. 

The area of most concern is the length requirement. Door height on 
many current vans limit the lengths of platforms, and buses with grec'ser 
door height are more expensive. The guideline has specified a minimum 
clear length of 40 inches. This means that at a minimum the lift will 
accommodate wheelchai-s of this length. Also, recognizing the character- 
istics of vvheel chai rs , roll stops, and barriers, a minimum clear distance 
of 44 inches at a two and one-half inch height is specified. This 
approach allows wheelchairs with footrests that would overhang the plat- 
form and have a length equal to or less than 44 inches to use the lift. 
The dimensions in these guideline specifications represent a realistic 
balance between the design limitations of current vehicles and the wheel- 
chair population. One class of wheelchairs that may be a problem are the 
newer three-wheeled models, which are longer than most other wheelchairs. 
The desired length requirements would accommodate a larger population of 
v.neelchairs but could exclude the consideration of certain vehicles. 

The height: requirements are based on anthropometric data. Human 
Dimension and Interior Space cited 1963 data showing that 97.5 percent of 
males in wheelchair had a seated height of 51.5 incnes or lower. No more 
recent data were cited. However, Human Dimension and Interior Space 
cited 1979 data on the seating height normal — the vertical distance from 
the sitting surface to the top of the head for a person in a relaxed 
position. The 95th percentile male has a sitting height normal of 
35.6 inches. Adding 19 inches for me seat height of wheelchair results 
in an overall height of 55.6 inches. The 56 inch height requirement 
accommodates this height and is compatible with most vehicles. Interior 
vehicle height should be greater to accommodate movement inside the 
vehicle. 



2.2.2 Surface 

The platform surface should be slip resistant under the conditions 
defined in Section 2.1.1. 

Rationale: A slip resistant surface reduces the potential for accidents 
and provides traction for a wheelchair. 



11 



2.2.3 Protrusions and Openings 

2.2.3.1 When a barrier is down, the platform should have no protru- 
sions from the surface greater than 1/4 inch or smooth rise 
greater than 1/2 inch, except for the stationary edge 
guards, inner roll stops, or outer barriers. 

2.2.3.2 The lift platform should not have any openings greater than 
3/4 inch in width, except for a hand hold not exceeding 
1-1/2 inch by 4-1/2 inches located midway between the edge 
barriers on semi-automatic lifts. 

Rationale: When lift barriers are down, movement on and off the platform 
should be easy and not inhibited by protrusions. A 1/4 inch protrusion 
can easily be negotiated by wheelchairs and is currently specified in the 
California Administrative Code. 

It must be noted that the language, "when the lift barrier is* down," 
has been chosen to allow protrusions when the barrier is up. Lift manu- 
facturers have indicated that mechanisms to hold a barrier in place may 
require protrusions through the lift platform when the barrier is up. 
These protrusions are allowable, but should not limit the size or type of 
wheelchairs that can use a lift. 

As discussed in Section 2.2.10, a lift platform may not be solid. 
The VA specifications use the 3/4 inch limit on openings; and it has been 
adopted for these guideline specifications. The exception to this 
requirement allows a hand hold for semi-automatic lifts. 



2.2.4 Gap Dimensions 

When a lift is at the floor loading and unloading position, the gap 
between the vehicle floor and the lift platform should be at a minimum. 
In no case should a gap have a vertical distance exceeding 5/8 inch or a 
horizontal distance exceeding 1/2 inch. 

Rationale: A series of subjective tests reported in the VA specifica- 
tions established the 5/8 inch vertical gap as the highest that should be 
allowed. The 1/2 inch horizontal gap was chosen to limit the overall gap 
opening to approximately 3/4 inch. The preferred option is to have no 
gap. 



2.2.5 Platform Deflection 

The lift platform should not deflect more than 3 degrees in any 
direction when tested in accordance with Section 3.1.3. 

Rationale: To reduce the ability of a wheelchair to gain additional 
speed and overcome the barrier or roll stop and to reduce the chance of a 
wheelchair tilting off the lift, a maximum deflection standard is 



12 



established. The three (3) degree deflection is currently found in the 
California Administrative Code. 



2.2.6 Edge Guards, Barriers, and Roll Stops 

Use one of the following options. Option A should be used unless 
your operating procedures are in agreement with those described at the 
beginning of Option B. 



Option A 

Edge guards should extend the full length of the lift plat- 
form on both sides and shall have a minimum height of one 
and one-half (1-1/2) inch. 

The lift should have an outer barrier or inherent design 
feature that retains a wheelchair on the platform when the 
platform is above the ground loading position. 

The outer barrier or inherent design feature should be 
designed to meet the test requirements of Section 3.1.6.1. 

The platform should have an inner roll stop or the design 
of the lift should use part of the vehicle as an inner roll 
stop. The inner roll stop or lift design should restrict 
the rolling movement of a wheelchair when the platform 1s 
in any operating position other than at the vehicle floor 
level position. 

The inner roll stop should be designed to meet the test 
requirements of Section 3.1.6.3. 

The contractor should identify and clearly emphasize in the 
operations and maintenance manuals any roll stop and bar- 
rier adjustments or maintenance actions that, if done 
improperly, could result in an unsafe condition. 



Option B 



When followed, operating procedures can reduce or eliminate poten- 
tially unsafe conditions. Recognizing that certain operating procedures 
can reduce certain risks and, therefore, change the safety requirements 
of a lift, this Option B is presented. Option B can be used when all of 
the operating procedures described in the following are adopted and man- 
dated for use by a transit operator. 



2.2.6.1 

2.2.6.2 

2.2.6.3 
2.2.6.4 

2.2.6.5 
2.2.6.6 



13 



Operating Procedures 

The objective of the following operating procedures is to eliminate the 
ability of a powered wheelchair to overcome a barrit?r and to provide safe 
lift operation. To accomplish this objective, the procedures are 
designed to disengage the power of a powered wheelchair and to require 
manual maneuvering of the wheelchair through the en:ire loading and 
unloading process, except when the lift is at the fully lowered posiiion. 
The operating procedures are: 

(A) /iith the lift platform in the lowered position, the wheelchair 
'■nay be loaded by the passenger in the power mode or by the 
operate r in a powered or unpowered mode. The wheelchair shall 
be loaced facing away from the vehicle with the operator on the 
ground either in front or to the side of the chair and 

ol atf or m. 

(B) Before the lift is raised the operator shall: 

(1) Ensure the power switch on the wheelchair is in the of' 
position. 

'2) Disengage all clutches on the wheelchair. 

(3) Lock all wheelchair brakes, if possible. 

^4) Ensure the passenger's hands and arms, are resting in t e 

passenger's lap or on the wheelchair arm rest away fro. 

the power control . 

(C) ^he wheelchair shall be placed a sufficierit distance ^n bac of 
:he barrier to allow unrestricted movement of the barrier t' 

its locked position. 

(D) 'he operator/driver shall physically check the barrier to m ke 
;ure it is in a locked position: 

1) After the lift platform has been raised a sufficient d s- 
tance above the ground for its locking mechanism to 
engage. 

2) Prior to loading a wheelchair on a lift platform when the 
lift platform is the raised position. 

(E) luring the raising or lowering of the lift platform, the 

I perato'/driver shall hold the wheelchair by an arm rest with 
lis arm straight and elbow locked. The lift controls shall be 
( peratei with the other hand. The driver shall be standing on 
"he grojnd with his feet apart when operating the lift. 

(F) 'he ope -ator/dri ver shall manually maneuver the wheelchair when 
»t is O'lboard the vehicle. 

(G) lihen loading the lift platform from the vehicle, the same of er- 
i.ting p;~ocedures will be used. The wheelchair shall be placad 

( suffii:ient distance in back of the barrier to allow 



14 



unrestricted movement of the barrier, the operator/driver shall 
physically check the barrie-- to make sure that it is in a 
locked position, and during the raising or lowering of the 
platform the operator/driver shall stand beside the platform 
with his feet apart and hold the wheelchair by an arm rest with 
his arm straight and the elbow locked. 

(H) The operator/driver shall be familiar with the instructions 
provided by the manufacturer on the safe loading of powered 
wheelchairs. 



2.2.6.1 Edge guards should extend the full length of the lift plat- 
form on both sides and shall have a minimum height of one 
and one-half (1-1/2) inch. 

2.2.6.2 The lift should have an outer roll stop or inherent design 
feature that restricts the rolling movement of a wheelchair 
on the platform when the platform is above the ground load- 
ing position. 

2.2.6.3 The outer roll stop should be designed tc meet the test 
requirements of Section 3.1.6.2. 

2.2.6.4 The platform should have an inner roll stop, or the design 
of the lift should use part of the vehicle as an inner roll 
stop. The inner roll stop or lift design should restrict 
the rolling movement of a wheelchair when the platform is 
in any operating position other than at the vehicle floor 
loading position. 

2.2.6.5 The inner roll stop shall be designed to meet the test 
requirements of Section 3.1.5.3. 

2.2.6.6 The contractor shall identify and clearly emphasize in the 
operations and maintenance manuals any roll stop adjust- 
ments or maintenance actions that if done improperly could 
result in an unsafe condition. 



Rationale: Edge guards can prevent a wheelchair from accidentally slid- 
ing over the sides of the lift. Since side barriers are not in the 
direct path of a wheelchair using a lift, they do not need to be designed 
to retain a wheelchair in direct forward or reverse motion. 



In 1985, Garrett Engineers, Inc. conducted tests for the Southern 
California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD). These tests showed that bar- 
riers on all existing passive wheelchair lifts could be overcome by com- 
mon powered wheelchairs. The powered wheelchairs could ride over the 
barriers or push them down. SCRTD initiated these tests following an 
accident investigation that indicated a powered wheelchair had defeated a 
barrier. Although active lifts were not tested, their design does not 
indicate they could retain a powered wheelchair on the lift. 



15 



Under Option A, the specifications require that the lift have a bar- 
rier that meets Section 3.1.6.1, which requires the barrier to prevent a 
powered wheelchair from leaving the platform. This requirement is aimed 
at eliminating the unsafe condition of a wheelchair powering over or 
through a barrier. 

Under Option B, operating procedures are presented that eliminate 
the unsafe condition that requires a barrier that meets the test require- 
ments of Section 3.1.6.1. In other words, the power and drive mechanism 
on a powe» ed whei.'lchair are disabled. Under this option the test 
requiremerts for a roll stop (rather than barrier) are used. The test 
described in Section 3.1.6.? is similar to that required by the VA. The 
VA tests V ere designed to retain a wheelchair without power on a lift 
pi atform. 

The ability of a lift to stop rolling movement on the inner portion 
of tne plctform s required by Section 2.2.6.4. The requirement can be 
met jy a roll stop or by a lift design that uses pa>-t of the vehicle as 
the "oll stop. 

The /Advisory Panel considered the accident scenarios invol\/ing tie 
inne:" roll stop different from that with the outer i)arrier. For this 
reasi3n different tests are recommended. An inner roll stop will not 
necessaril/ prevent an activated powered wheelchair from leav'ng the 
plat-"orm, 3ut must meet the requirements of Section 3.1.6.3. 

SectiDn 2.2.6.6 under both options requires the contractor to iden- 
tify any roll step and barrier adjustments or maintenance actions that if 
done improperly could result in an unsafe condition. This requirement is 
added to e ihance overall safe operation of the lift. 



2.2./ Hanirails 

2.2.7.1 When the lift is fully deployed, the platform should be 
equipped with one handrail. 

2.2.7.2 The top of the handrail should be 25 to 34 inches above the 
platform, should move with the platforir., and should be at a 
minimum 24 inches in length. 

2.2.7 3 The handrail should be capable of withstanding a horizontal 
force of 100 pounds concentrated at any point. 

2.2.7 4 The handrails should be between 1-1/4 inches and 1-1/2 

inches in diameter or width and should permit a full hand 
grio with no less than 1 inch of knuckle clearance. 

Rationale: Current active lifts primarily operate with one or no hani - 
rail. Although fDr unassisted passengers handrails on both sides are 
preferable, handrails can be a hinderance when assistance is being pro- 
vided. Two handrails reduce clear space above a lift platform and cai 



16 



impair a driver from providing assistance both on and off the lift. 
Thus, handrails are recommended only for one side of the lift. 

The handrail will provide support for passengers or a driver stand- 
ing on the platform as well as for a person in a wheelchair. It should 
be noted that the Advisory Panel had differing opinions concerning per- 
sons not in a wheelchair being allowed on the lift. Some opposed stand- 
ing on the lift, while others considered it an option. 

Handrails that move with a lift provide more of a sense of security 
from a user's point of view than stationary handrails attached to the 
vehicle. Stationary handrails in effect move relative the motion of 
the lift and are not as easy to grasp. Movable handrails are recommended 
by the Advisory Panel. 

The vertical height dimensions and the 100-pound force requirement 
are adapted from the Canadian Standards Association standard. The hand- 
rail dimensions are the same as found in the White Book and in the'Uni- 
form Federal Accessibility Standards. Knuckle clearance in the UFAS is 
1-1/2 inches. In the White Book it is 1 inch for door panels and 1-1/2 
inches elsewhere. Although the 1-inch clearance has been chosen to coin- 
cide with door panel clearance of the White Book, such clearances must 
also meet the safety requirements of Section 2.1.6.1 concerning pinching 
movements and shear areas. 



2.2.8 Platform Lighting 

When the lift is in operation, the platfonn should have a minimum of 
one (1) foot-candle of illumination when deployed- 
Rationale: Platform lighting provides for safer boardings when natural 
or other light is insufficient. The recommended level of illumination is 
adapted from the White Book specification. Nothing in ihis specification 
directs how the lighting is lo be provided. The contractor has the 
option to make the lighting system part of the vehicle or part of the 
lift system. 



2.2.9 Platform Markings (Optional) 

2.2.9.1 The side edges, the outer edge, and the inner edge of the 
platform, or the inner edge of the floor of the bus adja- 
cent to the lift should be clearly marked in a color dif- 
ferent from the lift platform. 

Rationale: This section is suggested. Members of the Advisory Panel 
differed on whether passengers should siand on a lift. However, it was 
agreed that these guidelines snould not encourage the practice. Many 
transit operators provide wheelchairs for ambulatory passengers to use 
during boa-^ding. The marking of the pla":form edges provides greater vis- 
ibility ani reduces the potential fo*" accidents. 



17 



2.2.10 Line of Sight 

When the platform is in a stowed position, it should not interfere 
with direct line of sight, especially between a passenger desiring to use 
the lift and the lift operator. 

Rationale: The operational requirements of a lift may result in a lift 
operator and passenger being separated by the lift platform. The line of 
sight requirement means that in such a situation the platform should not 
impair sight contact. The operator should be able to see through or 
around the lift platform. 



2.3 Structural 

The structural elements of the wheelchair lift include those that support 
working loads and attach the lift to the bus. They do not include mechanical 
and hydraulic components associated with operation and control of the lift. 



2.3.1 Lift Capacity 

The wheelchair lift should have a lift capacity of 600 pounds uni- 
form load. 

Rationale: Discussion with wheelchair manufacturers indicated that the 
f- wavier, powered wheelchairs can weigh up to 250 pounds. The 99th per- 
centile male weighs approximately 241 pounds. A combined weight is 491 
pounds. Two 99th percentile males (one handicapped person and one atten- 
dant) combined with a heavy manual wheelchair would have a weight of 
approximately 540 pounds. The current wheelchair market would appear to 
be accommodated by a design load of 500 pounds. Moreover, although pow- 
ered wheelchairs may change, it is anticipated that the weight will not 
increase substantially. 

A combination of an attendant, a handicapped person and a powered 
wh'.elchair could yield loads up to 750 pounds. However, this combination 
is not considered an appropriate design standard. A heavy powered wheel- 
chair could occupy most of the platform and not allow room for a person 
to stand on a lift. Also, a powered wheelchair provides independent 
movement and reduces the need for an attendant. Furthermore, some mem- 
bers of the Advisory Panel opposed anyone not in a wheelchair being on 
the lift. 



2.3.2 Structural Safety Factor 

The structural safety factor should be at least three (3) based on 
the ultimate strength of the construction material. 

Rationale: In the "Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators," ANSI/ASME 

A17. 1-1984, the design safety factor for structural components varies 



18 



depending on the function of the loaded member. They range from as high 
as 7.8 for bolts to as low as 2.2 for parts which are not considered 
critical from a safety standpoint. These safety factors are for eleva- 
tors traveling at speeds far above those of a wheelchair lift and allow 
for emergency stops and high acceleration forces. 

Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, Eighth Edition 
suggests that good design practice calls for factors of safety of 1.5 to 
4.0 based on yield strength of the material. The materials specified in 
ANSI/ASME A17. 1-1984 have yield strengths of about one-half based on the 
ultimate strength, so the Mark's safety factor can be reconciled with the 
"Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators." 

Recognizing that wheelchair lifts on transit vehicles are very slow 

moving relative to elevators, a design factor of three (3) has been 

designated for the lift. This is the same factor found in the California 
Administrative Code. 



2.3.3 Useful Life 

When used and maintained in accordance with manufacturer reconmended 
procedures, a wheelchair lift structure should be designed to have a use- 
ful life equal to the useful life of the vehicle on which it is used. 

Rationale: Once installed the lift becomes part of the vehicle. As with 
ether components of the vehicle, the lift with normal maintenance, 
including repair and replacement of parts, should be operable as long as 
the vehicle. Useful life of a transit bus is 12 years. Useful life of 
smal ler vehicles is less, with vans having a useful life of 3 to 5 years. 



2.3.4 Materials 

Structural components shall be made of steel or other durable con- 
struction material. 

2.3.4.1 Ferrous surfaces should be either plated with a protective 
coating or be cleaned and have a corrosion and abrasion- 
resistant flat protective finish. 

2.3.4.2 Nonferrous and nonmetallic surfaces should be coated using 
a durable finish. 

2.3.4.3 Stainless steel does not require coating or surface 
treatment. 

Rationale: The structural components of the lift are to have a useful 
life equal to that of the vehicle upon which they are mounted. Materials 
and coatings ident'fied in these guidelines are intended to ensure this 
useful lifn. The discussions of the Advisory Panel included using a salt 
spray test or paint thickness measurement to insure compliance. The VA 



19 



standard includes both ferrous material coating and test methods. How- 
ever, no specific tests or coating methods have been designated so that 
manufacturers can continue to use their preferred methods. Panel members 
considered placing any coatings or surface treatments on stainless steel 
unnecessary. 



2.3.5 Interface with the Vehicle 

2.3.5.1 Installation of the wheelchair lift should not reduce or in 
any way compromise the structural integrity of the vehicle 
and shall have a structural safety factor as specified in 
Section 2.3.2. 

2.3.5.2 Attachment of the wheelchair lift, including any modifi- 
cation of the vehicle, should not cause an imbalance of the 
vehicle that will adversely affect vehicle handling 
characteristics. 

2.3.5.3 No part of the installed and stowed lift should extend 
laterally beyond the normal width of the vehicle. 

2.3.5.4 The lift should not contact the opened door and/or door 
frame during deployment and normal operation. 

Rationale: The design of a wheelchair lift dictates the required space 
for installation. It should be the responsibility of the vehicle manu- 
facturer to determine compatibility of his vehicle's structural design 
with the selected lift. These guideline specifications require that the 
interface with the vehicle should have the same design safety factor as 
the lift structure. 

Interlocks that prevent lift operation unless a vehicle door is open 
are recommended. However, observations at public transportation opera- 
tions indicated that door adjustments or improper lift installation can 
result in interference between the lift and the door. These specifica- 
tions do not allow such operating conditions. Concurrently, these spec- 
ifications encourage increased door clearances and/or more precision in 
lift operation. This specification does not prohibit the use of brushes 
or other devices that are designed to allow contact between the door and 
lift. 



2.4 Mechanical and Hydraulic 

Mechanical and hydraulic components include all parts of the lift drive 
or control systems that support the platform load during normal operation of 
the wheelchair lift. 



20 



2.4.1 Mechanical and Hydraulic Safety Factors 

Mechanical and hydraulic components include all parts of the lift 
drive or control system that are subject to wear and degradation due to 
the operation of the lift. 

2.4.1.1 The mechanical component safety factor should be at least 
six (6) based on the ultimate strength of the material. 

2.4.1.2 Hydraulic components should comply with all applicable 
Society of Automotive Engineers Standards. These Standards 
include, but are not limited to the following. 

SAE J 190 - Power Steering Pressure Hose - Wire Braided 
SAE J 191 - Power Steering Pressure Hose - Low Volumetric 
SAE J 514APR80 - Hydraulic Tubing Fittings 
SAE J516JUN84 - Hydraulic Hose Fittings 
SAE J517JUN85 - Hydraulic Hose 

All other components that contain working fluid should have 
a minimum burst pressure of at least three (3) times normal 
design working pressure. 

Rationale: The mechanical safety factor is in agreement with the 
California Administrative Code. Also, "Safety Standard for Manlifts," 
ANSI A90. 1-1976 states that all parts of the machine shall have a safety 
factor of six (6) based on a full load. Although the wheelchair lift 
operates at a lower velocity and is subjected to less severe shock loads 
than a manlift, a safety factor of 6 is considered appropriate. The 
hydraulic system design guideline is structured to make use of applicable 
Society of Automotive Engineers Standards. Hydraulic components that are 
not the subject of SAE Standards should be burst pressure tested at least 
three times normal design working pressure to ensure the integrity of the 
complete hydraulic system. 



2.4.2 Platform Free-Fall Limits 

The platform loaded with the design load of 600 pounds should free- 
fall no faster than twice the normal descent rate in the event of any 
power or equipment failure during lift operation. 

Rationale: Twice the normal decent rate stated in Section 2.5.10.1 is 
12 inches per second. The California Administrative Code allows platform 
motion at up to 11.8 inches per second in normal operation and twice this 
speed in free-fall. Therefore, the free-fall speed specified here is 
approximately one half that of the California regulation. This reduced 
speed is still twice the normal speed of descent. The 12 inches per 
second was selected because this ratio seems achievable and safe. In 
addition, the Canadian Standards Association limits the free-fall rare of 
descent of the platform loaded to capacity (500 pounds) to 5 Inches per 
second . 



21 



Control Systems 



2.5.1 Control Unit 

2.5.1.1 The control unit should be a console or box with a function 
switch, an operating switch, or a combination thereof. The 
control unit may also have a power switch. 

2.5.1.2 The control unit location should allow the lift operator to 
have an unobstructed view of the platform during lift oper- 
ation and should allow the lift operator to be on or off 
the vehicle during lift operation. 

2.5.1.3 The control unit should be located in a position that mini- 
mizes its damage during use of the lift. 

2.5.1.4 The control console should have simple instructions on or 
near it that directs the operator in the lift operating 
procedures. 

Rationale: The control system should be simple. Operator error, a 
factor in lift accidents, can be reduced with simple control systems and 
instructions. Existing, popular active lift models do have easily under- 
stood controls that meet this requirement. Another safety factor is for 
the control unit to be located in a position that allows the lift opera- 
tor constantly to monitor lift operations. Tethered or pendant-mounted 
control units are common in the industry but must be carefully positioned 
for both safe operation and long life. The position is especially impor- 
tant if a local operator uses the operating procedures in Section 2.2.6, 
Option B. 



2.5.2 Control Power Switch 

The lift controls should have a power switch with two positions — on 
and off. The "on" position enables lift operation. The "off" position 
prevents lift operation. 

Rationale: The power switch must be on to operate the lift. This switch 
enables the function selection and the operating switches. This switch 
is considered important for the safe design of the control logic. The 
switch may be on the control unit. The switch may also be located else- 
where on the vehicle. For example, the switch may be activated by open- 
ing or closing the door that is used for the lift. 



2.5.3 Control Functions 

(Use one of the following optional sections) 
Option A - Automatic Control 

The complete wheelchair lift should be attendant operated, 

fully automatic, including folding and unfolding of the platform. 



22 



2.5.3.1 The lift control system should have at least four desig- 
nated operating functions as defined: 

(1) Up - raises a lift platform, while maintaining an 
operating position 

(2) Down - lowers lift platform, while maintaining an 
operating position 

(3) Fold - moves lift platform from an operating position 
to a stowed position 

(4) Unfold - moves lift platform from a stowed position to 
an operating position. 

2.5.3.2 The lift may have four additional optional functions as 
defined: 

(1) Outer Barrier Up - raises outer barrier 

(2) Outer Barrier Down - lowers outer barrier 

(3) Inner Roll Stop Up - raises inner roll stop 

(4) Inner Roll Stop Down - lowers inner roll stop. 



Option B - Semi -Automatic Control 

The complete wheelchair lift unit should be semiautomatic including 
a manual fold and unfold of the lift platform. The folding and 
unfolding of the lift from and to the stored position should be 
accomplished with not more than a 20-pound force. 

2.5.3.1 The lift control system should have at least two designated 
operating functions as defined: 

(1) Up - raises a lift platfonr., whi"!e maintaining an 
operating position 

(2) Down - lowers lift platform, while maintaining an 
operating position. 

2.5.3.2 The lift may have four additional optional functions as 
defined: 

(1) Outer Barrier Up - raises outer barrier 

(2) Outer Barrier Down - lowers outer barrier 

(3) Inner Roll Stop Up - raises inner roll stop 

(4) Inner Roll Stop Down - lowers inner roll stop. 

Rationale: To help reduce driver error in fleets with different lifts, 
the operating terminology is standardized for both automatic and semi- 
automatic lifts. A distinction is made between recommended functions and 
optional functions. The recommended functions are consicered the minimum 
acceptable for safe operation. Existing active lifts usually have an 
automatic barrier, and/or roll stop. The guideline allows an option for 
controlled barrier or roll stop operation. 



23 



It is important that durable markings identify the control func- 
tions. The durable markings help experienced operators and are vitally 
important when new or inexperienced operators are responsible for lift 
operation. 

No nationally established standards for manual lifting exist. Ergo- 
nomists make judgements and recommendations for each type of manual lift 
that is encountered. The 20-pound force for folding and unfolding the 
semi-automatic lift platform is based on recognition that at and below 
this number the force is considered moderate. Ergonomists suggest engi- 
neering control, such as power assists, when a 20-pound lift force is 
exceeded. 



2.5.4 Control Operating and Function Switches 

2.5.4.1 The control system should consist of 

t 

(a) separate operating and function selection switches 



or 



(b) integrated operating and function switches. 

2.5.4.2 The function selection switch or integrated switches should 
be labeled with the functions defined in Section 2.5.3. 



2.5.4.3 The operating switch or integrated operating and function 
switches should require continuous force to operate the 
lift; and release of the switches shall stop lift motion. 

2.5.4.4 The function selection switch or integrated operating and 
function switches should not allow the operation of more 
than one function at a time. 



Rationale: The control system allows two approaches. The first is a 
function selection switch, which is used to designate a function, and an 
operating switch that activates the function. The second approach is 
separate integrated switches. Under this approach separate or combined 
switches (e.g. a single button "up" switch or a combined "up" and "down" 
toggle switch with a neutral position) control lift operation. Both 
approaches would be possible only by momentary switches that would stop 
lift movement when released. Also, for safety purposes the lift will 
only perform one function at a time. 



2.5.5 Design Safety 

The control system should be designed to be fail-safe for single 
failure modes that would negate the proper operations of the interlocks 
specified in Section 2.5.8. A complete failure modes and effects 



24 



analysis (FMEA) should be provided that demonstrates that this design 
requirement has been met. 

Rationale: Safe operation is a primary concern of the guideline specifi- 
cations. The safety protection for some operator errors and equipment 
failures resides in the integrity of the interlocks and safety features 
of Section 2.5.8. The safety of the lift/vehicle system is enhanced by 
requiring that the interlocks remain in a known safe state under condi- 
tions of any single failure of the control system or loss of power to the 
control system. An FMEA is a frequently used method in safety analysis 
to demonstrate what a design will do unner selected failure modes. There 
are many reports and papers explaining FMEA. Three reports are: 

(1) Dussault, N. B., "The Evolution and Practical Applications of 
Failure Modes and Effects Analyses," RADC-TRC-83-72, March 
1983. 

(2) MIL-STD-7858, Sept. 15, 1980, "Reliability Program for Systems 
and Equipment Development and Production," Task 204, Failure 
Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA). 

(3) ARP 926 A, "Fault/Failure Analysis Procedure," SAE Aerospace 
Recommended Practice", Rev. 11-15-79. 

The first reference is a report that discusses several methods. The 
second reference is a Military Standard that is used in many defense sys- 
tem developments. The third reference is an SAE Recommended Practice 
used in the aerospace inaustry. 



?.5-6 Jacking Prevention 

The control system or inherent lift design should prevent the opera- 
tion of the lift from jacking the vehicle and causing damage to the vehi- 
cle or the lift. 

Rationale: To prevent damage to the lift or vehicle, the control system 
or inherent lift design shall not allow jacking. In some cases the 
release of load on the vehicle suspension when the lift platform reaches 
the ground is mistakenly considered jerking. 



2.5.7 Manual Operation 

The lift should have a manual method of ooeration permitting an 
operator to lower the platform to ground level from any position in its 
cycle with a wheelchair occupant on the platform. The manual method 
should also allow an unoccupied platform to be raised; and it should be 
possible to fold the lift to a service transport position. Barriers 
should be operable when the lift is in the manual mode. 



25 



Rationale: In the event of a power failure the lift must have a manual 
backup system to take passengers off the vehicle. Also, the manual oper- 
ation would allow the lift to be stowed in order for the vehicle to move. 
For safety reasons the barriers should be operable. 



2.5.8 Interlocks and Safety Features 



2.5.8.1 Interlocks may (1) prevent vehicle movement or (2) provide 
a driver warning light; unless the lift is up and folded. 

2.5.8.2 Interlocks may prevent lift activation and operation unless 
the vehicle is stopped and inhibited from moving and the 
appropriate door is open. 

2.5.8.3 An interlock or inherent design feature should prevent 
stowing of the lift when the platform is occupied. 

2.5.8.4 An interlock or inherent design feature should not allow a 
lift to move up or down when the platform is more than 
three (3) inches above the ground unless the outer barrier 
is raised and functioning. 



Rationale: The interlock and safety features are designed to prevent 
unsafe conditions. The first interlock is advisory with an option. 
Although the vehicle movement feature is recommended, providing such an 
interlock for small vehicles is technically difficult and, therefore, 
raises the cost. This interlock is easier for vehicles with air brakes. 
The Advisory Panel did consider a warning light as a desired option to 
help prevent vehicle movement if the li'^t is unfolded. 

The second interlock prevents lift movement unless the vehicle is 
appropriately inhibited from moving, and the lift can be deployed through 
an open door. This interlock reduces unsafe passenger conditions and 
damage to the lift or vehicle. The Advisory Panel debated the use of 
this interlock since it could cause problems in accident situations. It 
has been made optional, and, if used, must be designed with allowance for 
possible lift operation in emergency situations by people not familiar 
with lift details. 

A potential safety hazard is a lift folding while a passenger is on 
it. This condition should be prevented by an interlock or by design 
(e.g., some existing active lifts have electric motors for stowing that 
have limited lifting capacity preventing stowing of an occupied lift)., 

Barrier failure also can create a very hazardous condition. To pre- 
vent this condition the lift shall not be able to operate up or down 
unless the outer barrier is raised. 



26 



2.5.9 Wiring 

Wiring should be in accordance with SAE Recommended Practice SAE 
J1292 OCT 81 and referenced Standards, except when good engineering prac 
tice dictates special conductor insulations. 

Rationale: This SAE Recommended Practice, "Automobile, Truck, Truck- 
Tractor, Trailer, and Motor Coach Wiring," is accepted by the automotive 
industry and provides a baseline for design. The practice recognizes 
that unique design will require engineering practices that cannot be 
envisioned and incorporated into a recommended practice. 



2.5.10 Lift Operational Requirements 

2.5.10.1 The maximum speed of platform motion should be 6 inches 
per second. The operating time required to deploy the 
lift, lower or raise the platform, and stow the platform 
should not exceed 60 seconds. 

2.5.10.2 The maximum platform horizontal and vertical acceleration 
should be 0.3g. 

2.5.10.3 The maximum allowable jerk should be 0.3g/sec. 

Rationale: Lift operating speeds and cycle times are set in the White 
Br;ok as 5 seconds to deploy or stow and 15 seconds to raise or lower a 
,jassenger. Many transit operators consider tnis much too fast for the 
comfort and safety of the wheelchair occupant. The California Adminis- 
trative Code allows platform motion at up to 11.8 inches per second. 
This rate was also considered fast by the Advisory Panel. The transit 
authority bid packages reviewed in developing these guidelines have spec 
ified speeds and velocities in a wide variety of ways. The speeds and 
operating times specified here are designed to be compatible with the 
existing conditions, be acceptable to the transit agencies and wheelchai 
occupant, and not place new design requirements on lift manufacturers. 

"Safety Guidelines for Wheelchair Lifts on Public Transit Vehicles, 
UMTA-CA-06-0098-80-1 states that vertical and horizontal acceleration 
rates shall not exceed O.Bg and that jerk, the rate of change of acceler 
ation, shall not exceed 0.3g/seconds throughout horizontal motion of the 
occupied lift platform. These rates are used in this guideline, but the 
Advisory Panel generally agreed that lower rates are desirable. 

3.0 TESTING, CERTIFICATION, INSPECTION. AND WARRANTIES 



3.1 Design Tests 

The tests defined in Section 3.1 should be performed on one repre- 
sentative production unit of the wheelchair lift model purchased by this 



27 



procurement. Unless otherwise specified, the lift should meet the require- 
ments given in Section 2.0 when attached to a fixture that simulates a bus 
installation and when supplied by electric, hydraulic, air, or other power 
source of output equal to that normally available on the bus. Only one repre- 
sentative production unit is required to be tested for certification, with all 
tests of Section 3.1 conducted on the same unit without any repairs or main- 
tenance during the test other than that permitted by Section 3.1.11. 



3.1.1 Durability Tests 

The following tests should be performed without failure in the order 
given. 

3.1.1.1 Vertical Cycling Tests. The lift platform should be oper- 
ated up and then down through its maximum vertical operat- 
ing range for 15,600 cycles with a load of 600 pounds for 
the first 600 cycles and 400 pounds for the remainihg 
cycles. The ambient temperature for the first half of the 
cycles in each of these tests should be at least 110 F. 
The tests may be continuous or separated into groups of 
not less than 10 cycles with nonoperating periods of not 
more than one minute between each cycle in the group. The 
platform should raise and lower smoothly throughout the 
test with vertical and horizontal accelerations not 
exceeding 0.3g. 

3.1.1.2 Deployment Cycling Test. The lift platform of an auto- 
matic lift should be folded and unfolded for 10,000 
cycles. The ambient temperature for the first half of the 
cycles should be at least 110 F. The tests may be contin- 
uous or separated into groups and may have nonoperating 
periods between cycles as specified in Section 3.1.1.1. 

3.1.1.3 Combination Vertical and Deployment Cycling Test. The 
tests in Sections 3.1.1.1 and 3.1.1.2 may be combined into 
a single test that meets the minimum requirements of both 
tests. 

Rationale: The first two of the above tests are adapted from the 
California Administrative Code. Section 3.1.1.2 is only for automatic 
lifts. Since semi-automatic lifts do not have a power fold or unfold 
function, a durability test of fold and unfold is not necessary. Sec- 
tion 3.1.1.3 has been added to accommodate manufacturers equipped to con- 
duct the tests simultaneously. 

Note that the language in Section 3.1 does not mean that a manufac- 
turer must perform these tests for each procurement. Once a production 
unit of a specific lift model and vehicle combination has been tested, 
the design tests apply to all procurements of that combination. 



28 



3.1.2 Low Temperature Operation Test 

After 16 hours of exposure to a temperature not higher than 20 F, 
the wheelchair lift should be operated unloaded through 10 or more cycles 
of unfolding, lowering, raising, and folding (or lowering and raising for 
semiautomatic lifts) and through 10 or more cycles of raising and lower- 
ing with a 600-pound load. Each cycle should be separated by at least a 
30-minute cooling period at a temperature not higher than 20 F. The lift 
should meet all performance requirements while operating at the exposure 
temperature. 

Rationale: The above test is a modification of the low temperature test 
of the California Administrative Code. The major changes were to extend 
the soak time to correspond to an overnight storage at a low temperature, 
to add testing at the design load, and explicitly to require the lift to 
meet all performance requirements at the test temperature. 



3.1.3 Platform Deflection Test 

A static load of 400 pounds should be applied through the centroid 
of a test pallet placed at the centroid of the platform. The platform 
should be raised and lowered with this weight. During the lift operation 
the platform should not deflect more than three degrees in any direction 
from the loaded position and its unloaded position. 

Rationale: Section 3.1.3 has been adapted from the California Adminis- 
trative Code, which has a platform deflection requirement and from thp VA 
specifications. For these guideline specifications, platform deflection 
has been defined in terms of test requirements. 



3.1.4 Self-Damage Tests 

The controls should be held in operating position for 5 seconds 
after the unloaded lift meets resistance to its travel under each control 
position with any limit switch disabled. The test should be performed 
twice at each lift position of unfold, fold, full up at floor level, and 
full down at ground level. 

Rationale: Section 3.1.4 is adapted from the California Administrative 
Code. 



3.1.5 Power and Equipment Failure Test 

A failure of power, chain cable, hydraulic hose, or air hose that 
allows the lift to deploy or the platform to lower should be simulated. 
The wheelchair lift should comply with Section 2.4.2 during this test. 
An FMEA may be provided in lieu of conducting actual tests. 



29 



Rationale: Section 3.1.5 has also been adapted from the California 
Administrative Code. It has been modified by allowing an FMEA to be used 
in place of actual testing. Such an analysis examines the consequences 
of failures such as those specified for simulation. 



3.1.6 Outer Barrier and Outer Barrier Roll Stop Tests 

3.1.6.1 Outer Barrier Test (For Section 2.2.6, Option A) 

The contractor should test the ability of the outer barrier 
to retain a powered wheelchair. Two of four wheelchairs 
are to be tested. The Everest and Jennings 3K Marathon or 
the Invacare Power Rolls Arrow Model 4M929E and the Everest 
and Jennings Modular Power Chair 61 or the Fortress Scien- 
tific 655 should be used. The two wheelchairs and secured 
load should not leave the platform and the outer barrier 
should not be defected (driven through or climbed over) by 
the wheelchairs when tested under all of the following 
conditions: 

(a) fully charged battery system 

(b) equivalent occupant loads of both 110 and 250 pounds 

(c) operated both forwards and backwards 

(d) accelerated at full power from a starting position off 
of the lift platform and a minimum of 48 inches 
between the front edge of the foot rests or rim of the 
rear tires and the outer barrier 

(e) a platform positioned with a 8 degree outward slope 

(f) the lift platform in a raised position. 

The Everest and Jennings 3M Marathon or Invacare Power 
Rolls Arrow Model should be equipped with a standard adult 
size seat, standard foot rests, 20-inch rear wheels, eight- 
inch front casters, and a standard upright back. The 
Everest and Jennings Explorer Modular Power Chair or the 
Fortress Scientific 655 should be equipped with all the 
above features except that the front and rear tires should 
be 10 inches in diameter and the seating option and batter- 
ies should result in a gross wheelchair weight at or 
exceeding 210 pounds. 

3.1.6.2 Outer Roll Stop Test (For 2.2.6, Option B) 

A static load of 1600 pounds should be applied at a height 
of three (3) inches above and parallel to the wheelchair 
ground plane, evenly distributed over the full width of the 
outer roll stop device. The load will be applied for at 
least five (5) seconds with the lift platform at the floor 
level and also will be applied as the wheelchair ground 
plane moves down (or up). A load of 600 pounds will be on 



30 



the lift during the test if the wheelchair retaining opera- 
tion is dependent on such a load for its proper operation. 

3.1.6.3 Inner Roll Stop 

The contractor should test the ability of the inner roll 
stop to prevent a wheelchair from inadvertently rolling off 
the platform. In its raised position the roll stop should 
withstand a total force of at least 300 pounds parallel to 
the platform surface in the unloading direction. The force 
should be applied at a minimum height of 2-1/2 inches above 
the top surface of the platform with 150 pounds at each of 
two points 11.8 inches on each side of the center of the 
roll stop. Inherent design features may preclude the need 
for an inner roll stop. 

Rationale: The four whee'Chair models represent current wheelchairs that 
are powered and could override barriers. 1 hey have been selected because 
they have been identified as representing those models that are currently 
available and produce high and possibly the highest amounts of force that 
could overcome a barrier. 

Specific models of wheelchairs have been chosen to standardize this 

test and to make transit operators aware of the limits of the test. A 

transit operator faced with transporting wheelchairs more powerful than 

those mentioned (e.g., specially-adapted wheelchairs) will be faced with 
different safety and risk levels. 

The wheelchairs are to be tested with two different weights. The 
110-pound represents a 5th percentile woman. With this lighter load, a 
wheelchair would be more susceptible to climbing or bouncing over a bar- 
rier. The 250-pound load represents a 99th percentile male, the standard 
used in defining the design load. The heavier weight will test the abil- 
ity of a wheelchair to be powered through a barrier. 

The 48-inch distance is longer than the minimum allowable platform 
length and less than the combined platform length and interior clear dis- 
tance found on the same bus models. The 48 inches is considered a rea- 
sonable test distance. 

Section 3.1.6.1 (Option B) tests the outer roll stop under Option B 
of Section 2.2.6. The test is an adaption of the test required by the 
VA. 

The inner roll stop test specified in Section 3.1.6.2 is adapted 
from that currently required for an outward barrier under the California 
Administrative Code. This test appears designed to prevent inadvertent 
rolling off of a platform. The 2-1/2-inch test height requires a minimum 
roll stop height of 2-1/2 inches. This is the same heighr required by 
the CSA. The California Administrative Code and the VA require minimum 
roll stop heights of 3 inches or more. VA tests showed that under simu- 
lated lift conditions, a wheelchair could roll over a 2-inch oarrier but 



National Workshop on 
Bus-Wheelchair Accessibifity 



Guideline Specifications for 
Passive Wheelchair Lifts 



May 7-9, 1986 
Seattle, Washington 



Prepared by 

Battelle Columbus Division 
505 King Avenue 
Columbus, Ohio 43201 

Prepared for 

Office of Bus and Paratransit Systems 
Urban Mass Transportation Administration 
Washington, D.C. 20590 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



These guideline specifications are the culmination of many hours of hard work 
by persons representing all facets of the accessible transit and paratransit 
industry. The Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) recognized that 
the technology associated with accessible transportation could be improved 
and sponsored an Advisory Panel in order to develop industry guideline specifi- 
cations. Representing different viewpoints and different interests, the members 
of the Advisory Panel met, discussed issues, and developed these guideline 
specifications. It is a credit to the Advisory Panel and the dedication of 
its members that a formal vote never had to be taken and that the guideline 
specifications were developed on the basis of consensus. 

Several people need to be acknowledged for the assistance they provided to 
the Advisory Panel in the development of ihese guidelines. George I. Izumi, 
the UMTA Project Manager, was responsible for planning and organizing the 
Advisory Panel, planning for the Workshop, and contributed greatly to the 
development of the guidelines. Vincent R. DeMarco, the UMTA Program Manager, 
was responsible for guiding the efforts of the Advisory Panel and for planning 
and conducting the Workshop. Two other persons from the U.S. Department of 
Transportation also provided assistance. Christina Chang of the Trcinsportation 
Systems Center helped to organize and run the Workshop and prepare Workshop 
Proceedings. Scott York of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
■participated in the Advisory Panel meetings and assisted in clarifying certain 
safety issues. The Battel le project team of Gerald A. Francis (consultant), 
Martin Gombert (ATE Management and Service Company, Inc.), Roll and D. King, 
and David M. Norstrom was responsible for developing the draft guideline 
specifications and serving as a technical resource to the Advisory Panel. 
Specia' recognition is given to Mr. Norstrom who skillfully managed the 
guideline development process and led the discussions of the Advisory Panel 
meetings that obtained a general consensus of the Advisory Panel on each 
guideline subject. Finally, appreciation goes to each member of the Advisory 
Panel who gave of their time and contributed their expertise to the development 
of these industry guidelines. 



i i 



PREFACE 



On September 17, 1985, the Administrator, Ralph L. Stanley, of the Urban Mass 
Transportation Administration called together a meeting with representatives 
of transit agencies, handicapped organizations, rehabilitation specialists 
and manufacturers of buses and wheelchair lifts to hear first hand the problems 
and issues regarding transit bus wheelchair accessibility. As a result of 
this meeting, the Administrator requested that an UMTA Advisory Panel be formed 
to plan a National Bus Wheelchair Accessibility Workshop and to guide the 
development of a set of guideline specifications for the equipment required 
for transit bus and paratransit vehicle wheelchair accessibility. A contract 
was issued to Battel le to assist UMTA in this effort. 

As a result of surveying the transit industry for input and meeting with the 
Advisory Ptnel , Battel le prepared a draft set of guideline specifications for 
wheelchair lifts, securement devices and ramps for presentation and discussion 
at the National Bus Wheelchair Accessibility Workshop held in Seattle, 
Washington, on May 7 through 9, 1986. Using the inputs developed during the 
Workshop and the written comments submitted following the Workshop, the . 
Advisory Panel prepared these final guideline specifications. 

These guideline specifications are advisory in nature. The intention of the 
guideline specifications is to provide transit agencies with a model that they 
could use, as appropriate, in the development of their specifications for 
wheelchair accessibility. In the guideline specifications, where the word 
"should" is used, the recommendation of the Advisory Panel is that the 
suggested item or value be included in a general specification. Where the 
word "may" is used, the Advisory Panel recommends that the item or choice of 
value, be considered for inclusion based upon local operating conditions. 
The ..dvisory Panel has developed these guidelines for use throughout the United 
S'^jtes. It recognizes that unique local conditions could make an item suggested 
for inclusion inappropriate and a local public transportation provider would 
b? required to make the appropriate changes (e.g. to accommodate extreme 
environmental conditions). 

This guideline specification is one of four specifications developed by the 
Advisory ^anel , which developed separate guideline specifications for passive 
wheelcr.a'r lifts (those used primarily on transit buses), active wheelchair 
lifts ^tiose used primarily on paratransit vehicles), ramps and securement 
aevices. Members of the Advisory Panel participated actively in the develop- 
ment of each individual guideline specification based upon their experience 
and interest. Although the Advisory Panel discussed mv.y ^-elated accessibility 
issues, these guideline specifications focus only on the technical requirements 
of a specific piece of equipment. They have been prepared to assist in the 
purchase of such eouioment either separately or as part of an overall vehicle 
procurement. 



ADVISORY PANFL 



The following individuals participated in the Advisory Panel for the 
development of the draft guideline specifications of passive wheelchair lifts, 
active wheelchair lifts, ramps, and wheelchair securement devices. 

Mr. Tom Bonne! 1, The Braun Corporction, Winamac, Indiana 

Mr. James Burton, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, Washington 

Mr. Dennis Cennon, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 
Washington, D.C. 

Mr. RichLrd Daubert, Collins Special Products, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Ms. Mary Lou Daily, Metropolitan Boston Transit Authority, Boston, 
Massachusetts 

Mr. James EleL-.s, New Jersey Transit, Maplewood, New Jersey 

Ms. Pat Flinchbaugh, York Transportation Club, York, Pennsylvania 

Mr. Robert Garside, Regional Transportation District, Denver, Colorado 

Mr. Howard Hall, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, 
California 

Mr. William Henderson, Senior Services of Snohomish County, Everett, 
Washington 

Mr Greg R. Hill, General Motors Corporation, Pontiac, Michigan 

Steve Holmstrom, Aeroquip Corporation, Jackson, Michigan 

Mr. William Jensen, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento 
California 

Mr. R. Philip Jones, Everest and Jennings. Camarillo, California 

Ms. Denise Karuth, G-^vernor's Commission on Accessible Transportation, Boston, 
Massachusetts 

Mr. Pau i Kaufman, New Jersey Transit, Maplewood, New Jersey 

Kr. Frcnk Kirshner, Southern California Rapid Transit District, Los Angeles, 
Cal ifornia 

Mr. John Kordalski, Veterans Administration, Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Mike Kurtz, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 
Washington, D.C. 

Ms. Jan Little, Invacare Corporation, Elyria, Ohio 

Ms. F"an Lowder, METRO Citizen's Advisory Committee, Arlington, Virginia 
Mr. Jeff Mark, General Motors Corporc': ion, Pontiac, Michigan 



Mr. Keith McDovell, Aiierican Seating, Grand Rapids» Michigan 

Mr. Donald Meacham, Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, Ohio 

Mr. Austin Morris, Environmental Equipment Corporation, San Leandro, 
Cal ifornic 

Mr. Rod N.ish, Collins Industries, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Charles Neel, General Motors Corporation, Pontiac, Michigan 

Mr. James Nolir, Champion Bus Company, Imlay City, Michigan 

Ms. Sandra Perkins, Wcishington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 
Washington, D.C. 

Mr. James Reaume, Q-Straint, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada 

Mr. Joe Reyes, Southern California Rapid Transit District, Los Angeles, 
California 

Mr. Larry Sams, Mobile' Technology Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Donald Smith, Li fl.-U- Incorporated, Kent, Washington 

Dr. David Thomas, Transportation Management Associates, Fort Worth, Texas 

Mr. Lance Watt, The Flxible Corporation, Delaware, Ohio 

Mr. Vic Willems, Mobile Technology Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Chuck Stephens, Lift-U-Incorporated, Kent, Washington 



V 




,1 



i 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

1.0 GENERAL 1 

1.1 Scope 1 

1.2 Definitions 1 

1.3 Abbreviations 3 

< 

1.4 Reference Documents 3 

2.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 5 

2.1 General Requirements 5 

2-2 Platform 10 

2.3 Structural 16 

2.4 Mechanical and Hydraulic 19 

2.5 Control Systems 20 

3.0 TESTING, CERTIFICATION, AND INSPECTION 26 

3.1 Design Tests 26 

3.2 Acceptance Test (Optional) 32 

3.3 Environmental Tests 33 



vi 



1.0 GENERAL 



1.1 Scope 

These guideline specifications relate to passive lifts that are used by 
handicapped individuals to assist in boarding public transportation vehiclp.s. 
A passive lift is defined as a lift that when stowed allows the unimpeded use 
of the vehicle door in which the lift is located. These guidelines specifica- 
tions have been developed with special concern for the safety of passengers 
using a lift and reliability of lift operations. 



1.2 Definitions 

The following definitions apply for this document. 

Accessible Vehicle - A vehicle that has been equipped to allow bojairding 
by passengers who by reason of handicap are physically unable to board 
the vehicle that has not been so equipped. 

Active Li^t - An active lift is one that when stowed may interfere with 
the use of the vehicle entrance where the vehicle is located and that 
when being raised or lowered operates primarily outside the body of ttie 
vehic e. 

Arc Lift - This term denotes the type of lift that has an arcing motion 
during operation as differentiated from elevator lift. 

dBA - This term denotes decibels with reference to O.GOO^^ microbar as 
measured on the "A" scale. 

Deploy - The term used to denote the operation of a lift from a stowed 
position to an operating position. 

De'.iqn Load - The maximum weight capacity a lift is designed to raise or 
Ic-^'/er. 

C 'if ting - The unintenoed movement of a lift from a stowed position. 

Elevator Lift - This term denotes the type of lift that has a vertical up 
and down movement as differentiated from an arc lift. 

Factor of Safety (Design Safety Factor) - The factor of safety is the 
ultimate strength of a material divided by the working stress. A struc- 
ture fails or breaks when loaded to its ultimate strength. A structure 
deforms or takes set when loaded to its yield strength. 

Fail-safe - A characteristic of a system and its elements whereby any 
malfunctions affecting safety will cause the system to revert to a known 
safe state. 



2 



Interlock - The arrangement in which the operation or position of one 
mechanism automatically allows or prevents the operation of another. 

Lift or Wheelchair Lift - A level change device used to assist those with 
limited mobility in the use of transit and paratransit services. The 
terra lift and wheelchair lift are used interchangeably in this document. 

Maintenance Personnel Skill Levels - Maintenance personnel skills used in 
this document are defined in accordance with the White Book specifica- 
tions as follows: 

5M: Specialist Mechanic or Class A Mechanic Leader 

4M: Journeyman or Class A Mechanic 

3K: Service Mechanic or Class B Serviceman 

2M: Mechanic Helper or Coach Serviceman 

IM: Cleaner, Fueler, Oiler, Hostler, or Shifter. 

May - This terra shall be construed as permissive. 

Mechanical and Hydraulic Components - Mechanical and hydraulic components 
include all parts of the lift drive or control system that are subject to 
wear and degradation due to the operation of the lift. 

Paratransit Operation - Paratransit operation refers to a public trans- 
portation operation (service, vehicles, facilities, etc.) that is not a 
transit operation. 

rassive Lift - A passive lift is one that when stowed allows the unim- 
peded use of the vehicle door in which the lift is located. 

Pinching Point - A location where two closely spaced parts of machinery 
can move together to create a human hazard. 

Shear Area - A hazardous condition or location where a moving part 
approaches or crosses a fixed part. 

Shr jld - The term is to be construed as recommended by the Advisory 
Panel . 

Slip Resistant - A characteristic of a surface of a material that reduces 
unintended relative motion with respect to another surface with which it 
has contact. 

Structural Elements - The structural elements of the wheelchair lift 
include those that support working loads and attach the lift to the 
vehicle. They do not include mechanical and hydraulic components asso- 
ciated with operation and control of the lift. 

Stow - This terra denotes the movement of a lift from an operating posi- I 
tion to a position where the lift is stored and does not interfere with 
passenger use of entrance. i 



3 



Transit Operation - Transit operation refers to a public transportation 
operation (service, vehicles, facilities, etc.) that operates with fixed 
routes and fixed schedules. 

White Book - This terra is the common name for "Baseline Advance Design 
Transit Coach Specifications." Originally published by UMTA on April 4, 
1977, it is now available from the American Public Transit Association. 

Wheelchair - A seating arrangement that is positioned on wheels, may be 
powered or unpowered, and can be used to assist mobility limited 
individuals. 

Wheelchair Securement Device - A device anchored to a vehicle and used to 
limit the movement of a wheelchair when the vehicle is in motion. 



1.3 Abbreviations 

The following abbreviations may be found in the guideline. 



ANSI - 


— American National Standards Institute 


ASME - 


— American Society of Mechanical Engineers 


ASTM - 


— American Society for Testing and Materials 


CSA - 


— Canadian Standards Association 


FMEA - 


-- Failure Modes and Effect Analysis 


FMVSS - 


-- Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 


NHTSA - 


— National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 


SAE - 


— Society of Automotive Engineers 


SCRTD - 


— Southern California Rapid Transit District 


UFAS - 


-- Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards 


UMTA - 


— Urban Mass Transportation Administration 


VA 


— Veterans Administration 



1.4 Reference Documents 

(1) American National Standards Institute 
1430 Broadway, New York, N.Y. 10018 

ANSI A17-1983 

Elevator and Escalator Committee Interpretations 

ANSI /ASME A17. 1-1984 

Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators 

ANSI A90. 1-1976 

Safety Standards for Manlifts 



4 



(2) American Public Transit Association. "Baseline Advanced Design 
Transit Coach Specifications," includes Addendums 1 through 20 that 
were made to the April 1977 issue of "Baseline Advanced Design 
Transit Coach Specifications," published by Urban Mass Transporta- 
tion Administration. (Commonly known as The White Book.) American 
Public Transit Association. April 1983. 

(3) Baumeister, Theodore, Aval lone, Eugene A., and Baumeister, Theodore 
(III). Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, Eighth 
Edition . New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 1978. 

(4) California Administrative Code, Title 13, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4, 
Article 15. Wheelchair Lifts. 

(5) Canadian Standards Association. "Motor Vehicles for the Transpor- 
tation of Physically Disabled Persons," CAN3-D409-M84. Ontario, 
Canada: Rexdale. April 1984. 

(6) Canyon Research Group, Inc. "A Requirements Analysis Document for 
Transit Vehicle Wheelchair Lift Devices." Prepared for Urban Mass 
Transportation Administration, Westlake Village^ California. June 
1978. 

(7) 'Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard," Code of Federal Regula- 
tions , Title 49, Part 571 No. 207, Seating Systems, and No. 210," 
Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. 

(8) Henderson, William H., Dabney, Raymond L., and Thomas, David D. 
Passenger Assistance Techniques: A Training Manual for Vehicle 
Operators of Systems Transporting the Elderly and Handicapped, 
Third Edition . Fort Worth, Texas: Transportation Management Asso- 
ciates. 1984. 

(9) James, D. I. "A Broader Look at Pedestrian Friction." Rubber Chem- 
istry and Technology , Vol. 53, pp 512-541. 

(10) Panero, Julius and Zelnik, Martin. Human Dimensions and Interio r 
Space . New York: Whitney Library of Design. 1979. 

(11) Society of Automotive Engineers. Standards, Recommended Practices, 
Information Reports. 

(12) Stewart, Carl F. and Reinl, Herbert G. "Safety Guidelines for 
Wheelchair Lifts on Public Transit Vehicles." Prepared for Urban 
Mass Transportation Administration (UKTA-CA-06-0098-80-1) . 
California Department of Transportation. July 1, 1980. 



(13) "Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards." Federal Register (49 FR 
31528). August 7, 1984. 



5 



(14) "Veterans Administration Wheelchair Lift Systems: VA Standard 

Design and Test Criteria for Safety and Quality of Automatic Wheel- 
chair Lift System for Passenger Motor Vehicles." Federal Register 
(49 FR 21390). Ma^y 17, 1978. 



2.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 



2.1 General Requirements 

The wheelchair lift should meet the technical requirements given in 
Section 2.0. 



2.1.1 Operating Environment 

The lift should operate in temperature ranges of -10 F to 115 F, at 
relative humidities between 5 percent and 100 percent, and at altitudes 
up to 5,000 feet above sea level- Degradation of performance due to 
atmospheric conditions should be minimized at temperatures below -10 f", 
above 115 F, or at altitudes above 5,000 feet. 

Special procedures, hydraulic fluids, and/or lubricants may be used 
to operate the lift for the low and/or high temperature operating 
conditions. 

Rationale: The urban areas of the United States have broad ranges of 
climatic conditions. Weather data indicate that many cities have 
recorded 100 days or more per year of over 90 F temperatures. Likewise, 
many have recorded 20 or more days per year below 0 F. The annual rain- 
fall ranges as high as 60 inches per year to a low cf A inches per ye&r. 
The normal snow and sleet precipitation in some cities reach 88 inches, 
per year. The recommended guidelines cover a broad range of conditions 
found in the United States and are adapted from the White Book 
specifications. 



2.1.2 Weight 

The weight of the lift should not adversely affect the legal axle 
loadings, the maneuverability, structural integrity, or the safe opera- 
tion of the vehicle in which it is installed. 

Rationale: For legal and safety reasons the weight of the lift should 
not adversely affect the bus. Since existing lifts reportedly meet these 
requirements, the weights of existing lifts are considered acceptable. 
The recommended upper limit is 3,000 pounds, which does not exclude any 
existing model . 



6 



2.1.3 Operation Constraints 

2.1.3.1 The lift should operate when the lift platform is level 
and on any angle up to five (b) degrees or 8.7 percent in 
both the longitudinal and transverse direction. 

2.1.3.2 The lift should be deployable when the curb levels are at 
least three and one-half (3-1/2) inches below the first 
step of the vehicle, the vehicle is on level ground, and 
and the vehicle is at the manufacturer's specified ride 
height. 

Rationale: A lift will operate in a variety of different topographical 
conditions and must do so safely and reliably. This specification iden- 
tifies a balance between the topographical conditions to be accommodated 
by the lift design and the conditions where a lift will not be required 
to operate. In this latter case a bus stop zone would be considered 
inaccessible unless changes were made (e.g. a platform or pad installed 
at the bus stop zone) that allowed lift operation. 

No specification reviewed during the development of these guide- 
lines identified any requirements in terms of the roll of the bus. The 
VA sets an operational limit of 9 degrees in any direction of tilt for 
the maneuvering of a powered wheelchair. A seven (7) percent grade 
specification is currently used by Seattle Metro in its lift procurement. 
Since a fully loaded lift can tilt up to 3 degrees (see Section 2.2.5), 
the 5 degree parameter was chosen in order to be less than the 9 degree 
limit when the 3 degree tilt is considered. The three and one-half 
(3-1/2) inch distance above a curb in Section 2.1.3.2 can be met by 
existing lifts. 

This section is advisory. It has been included to provide a design 
guide for manufacturers. Concurrently, it can be used by transit opera- 
tors to help define inaccessible bus stops. These guidelines do not 
assume the wheelchair lift will operate in all topographical conditions. 
Some current stops of a transit operator may be inaccessible. The tran- 
sit operator would have to change the topography of the stop or change 
its location to provide accessibility. 



2.1.4 Boarding Direction 

A lift should be capable of handling a wheelchair in both an inwar 
and outward facing position on the lift. 

Rationale: The Advisory Panel considered outward facing to be the recom 
mended position. However, emergency or other factors may require inward 
facing. For example, the ability to maneuver inside the bus or at a bus 
stop may require a person in a wheelchair to use a lift in either direc- 
tion. To accommodate the passenger, the lift needs to be able to accept 
and operate with a wheelchair facing either inward or outward. 



7 



2.1.5 Location of Lift (Use one of the following options) 

(Option A) The lift should be installed in the front door of the 
bus. 

(Option B) The lift should be installed in the rear door of the 
bus. 

(Option C) The lift should be installed in either the front or 
rear door of the bus. 

Rationale: The issue of lift location generated many comments from advo- 
cates of either front door or rear door lifts. The location of the lift 
is a local decision based on local conditions. No "iocation is univer- 
sally agreed to be better than another. A transit operation should 
assess several factors before specifying a lift location, since doing so 
can exclude certain bus manufacturers from bidoing. If a clear prefei^- 
ence is not evident, the location should be optional. 

Among the factors to be considered are the following: 

Accident Data - Accident data from different sources supported both front 
door and rear door locations. A transit operation should assess its own 
accident history in terms of accidents involving front or rear door 
operation. 

Bus Stop Topography - Positioning a lift for use is affected by bus stop 
topography. Vehicle maneuverability requirements at a bus stop differ- 
between front and rear door lifts. 

Operating Policie s - A driver must leave his seat to operate current rear 
door lifts. Current operating policies or labor rules may prohibit such 
actions and would need to be changed. 

Communication with Driver - Better communication between the driver and 
the mobility limited passenger is possible when the wheelchair securement 
is located near the front of the vehicle. 

Interior Maneuverability - On some vehicles wheelchair maneuverability in 
the front of a vehicle can be restricted by fare boxes or other items. 
Rear door entry is normally not as restricted. 

Dwell Time - The dwell time at a bus stop can be affected by the location 
of a lift. As noted above, a driver must leave his seat to operate cur- 
rent rear door lifts. However, the location and type of securement 
device and the interior maneueverabi 1 i ty can also affect dwell time. 
Properly positioned securement devices may require less time when ass:ci- 
ated with a rear door lift. Thus, in terms of dwell time the lift loca- 
tion must be considered with regard to other factors.. 

Lift Dimensions - Some buses can accommodate larger lifts in the rear 
door. Specifying wider l"^fts may force some manu- acture^-s to OT'fer a 
rear door lift. 



8 



Fare Collection - The fare box on a transit vehicle is almost always in , 
the front. Rear door boarding requires different fare collection j 
procedures. 

Current Lift Location - If a transit property currently has front or rear; 
door lifts, it may find it advantageous to procure more of the same. Fori 
example, if a transit operator has invested in pads or made other bus | 
stop improvements based on current lift location, procuring vehicles with j 
a different lift location might require more bus stop improvements. 
Mixed lift locations also put extra demands on passengers and drivers. 



Signals 

j 

When the lift is being deployed, the lift should have an 
audible warning signal of 85 dBA (as measured five feet j 
outside the door of the vehicle). ' 

4 

4 

2.1.6.2 When the lift is being deployed, operated, or stored, the ■ 
four-way flasher, hazard lights on the vehicle should be i 
operating automatically. 

i 

Rationale: Transit operators report that lift accidents involve both ! 
persons using and not using the lift. The audible warning will signal j 
passengers at a bus stop that the lift is being deployed. The 85 dBA ; 
level is a frequently used level for annunciators. A person can be •■ 
exposed to this sound level for long periods of time without hearing dam- | 
age; and the level is loud enough that it can be heard above normal back- j 
ground noise. 

The four-way flasher, hazard lights will serve as a visual signal 
that the lift is being deployed. Since lift operation adds to the dwell 
time at a bus stop, the visual signal will alert motorists that the bus 3 
will be stopped for a longer than usual period. Although this require:- | 
ment adds costs that could be avoided with an operational policy that 
drivers activate the hazard signals, to avoid human error the guidelines J 
specifications require automatic warning lights. m 

2.1.7 Maximum Noise Level Ij 

The operating noise level of the lift should not exceed 75 dBA i 
inside the vehicle or on the lift platform, except for the audible warn- | 
ing signal as specified in Section 2.1.6.1. 

Rationale: The lift operation should not audibly disrupt the transit 
operations nor should it obscure the warning signal. The 75 dBA leve"! 
has been used by the San Diego Transit Corporation in its lift specif ica-j 
tions and has been adopted for use in these guidelines. i' 

h 

i i 



2.1.6 Warning 
2.1.6.1 



9 



2.1.8 Protective Covering 

2.1.8.1 Pinching movements, shear areas or places where clothing or 
other objects could be caught or damaged should be covered 
or in other ways protected to prevent passenger injury. 

2.1.8.2 All exposed edges or other hazardous protrusior^s on the 
wheelchair lift should be protected to minimize injury dur- 
ing lift operation and in case of accident. 

Rationale: To ensure safer operations, potentially hazardous areas 
should be protected. This is especially true of lift operations where 
individuals with certain handicaps have limited control of or feelings in 
parts of their body and may not sense a hazardous condition. When a haz- 
ardous area cannot be adequately covered or padded, the lift manufacturer 
must use other means to ensure safety. One alternative is a pressure 
sensing device that would automatically stop lift movement if an object 
is detected. 



2.1.9 Operation Counter (Optional) 

The lift may have an operations or use counter that records each 
complete cycle of the lift. 

Rationale: A counter can provide data on lift use. The data would be 
especially useful in recording lift cycling, scheduling maintenance, and 
evaluating the performance of the lifts. The Advisory Panel considered 
this feature useful but not required. Local operating pr'actices woulc 
determine whether it should be an option. The additional cost ofthis 
item may be offset by lower operating costs resulting from more timely 
maintenance. 



2.1.10 Power Source Interface 

The lift should operate and meet all requirements of these specifi- 
cations while using the electrical and/or hydraulic power sources nor- 
mally used on public transportation vehicles. The lift should meet these 
requirements whenever those power sources are performing within their 
specified ranges. The lift should continue to meet the requirements cf 
Sections 2.4.2, 2.5.5, 2.5.8, and 2.5.11 during and following power 
source transients, including failure, that may be experienced on transit 
vehicles. 

Rationale: The electrical and hydraulic interface between the vehicle 
and the lift is an important consideration in lift performance. This 
guideline is intended to ensure both proper interface consideration for 
normal operations and safe lift conditions in abnormal situations. 

The GLideline specifications have been developed for passive lifts 
and diesel buses. Although much of the guideline SDecif iceti'o'^s could be 



10 



used for other modes of transit, not all sections would apply. This 'S 
especially true for this section relative to trolley buses. The power 
source of a trolley bus places special requirements on the power source 
interface between the lift and the vehicle. A transit property planning 
to purchase lifts for use in trolley buses may have to add other power 
source interface requirements. 



2.2 Platform 



2-2.1 Dimensions 

2.2.1.1 The lift platform should have a minimum clear width of 
28-1/2 inches. It is desired to have a minimum clear width 
of 32 inches. 

2.2.1.2 The minimum clear width between any handrails at tHe height 
of 14 inches or more above the platform surface should be 
31 inches. It is desired to have a minimum clear width of 
35 inches. 

2.2.1.3 The minimum clear length of the lift platform as measured 
between the outer barrier and the inner roll stop should be 
40 inches. At a distance two and one half inches above the 
platform, the clear distance should be 44 inches. It is 
desired to have a minimum clear distance of 44 inches at 
platform level and 48 inches, two and one half inches above 
the surface. 

{ 

Rationale: Current passive lifts have overall widths of 30 to 42 inches 
and lengths of 40 to 47 inches. Barriers, roll stops, and handrails, can 
reduce the effective clearance below these dimensions. 

The effective length of wheelchairs includes the length added by 
footrests, which means wheelchairs are shorter at ground level than at 
footrest level. Section 2.2.1.3 recognizes this fact by specifying a 
minimum platform length and a minimum clear width at a distance of ' 
2-1/2 inches above the platform. 

1 

Estimates on current wheelchair sizes were obtained from two manu- 
facturers end more detailed information was found in a 1978 report, "A 
Requirements Analysis Document for Transit Vehicle Wheelchair Devices." 



11 



The data are summarized in the following table: 



Estimate of Wheelchair Dimensions 



1986 1987 
Invacare Everest & Jennings Everest & Jennings (1) 
Percenti le Length Width Length Width Length Width 



100/99 


48 


30 


77-1/2(2) 


28-1/2 


47 


31-7/8 


99 






52/47-1/2(3) 


26-1/2 


43-1/2 


26-1/4 


90 


44 


26 




26-1/2 


42-1/2 


26-1/4 


85 










42 




80 


44 


24 








« 

* 



(1) "A Reguirements Analysis Document for Transit Vehicle Wheelchair Lift 
Devices," Canyon Research Group, Inc., June 1978. 



(2) 77-1/2 inches represents a partially reclined, recliner wheelchair. 

(3) 52 inches represents a recliner wheelchair and 47-1/2 inches represents a 
regular wheelchair. 



The dimensions of the lift are influenced by the width of the •vehi- 
cle doors and the floor height. The following table presents examples of 
these dimensions found on buses sold in the United States: 



Door and Floor Height Dimensions 
for Selected U.S. Standard Size Buses 



Examples of Typical Door Width(^) Floor Height 



U.S. Standard Size Buses 


Front Door 


Rear Door 


Front Door 


Rear Door 


Flxible Corporation-Metro 


35 in. 


30 in. 


30 in. 


34.9 in. 


General Motors Corp.-RTS 04 


30 in. 


44 in. 


32 in. 


35.75 in. 


Neoplan- T-Drive ADB 


34.5 in. 


34.5 in. 


31 in. 


37 in. 


Scania-CN112 


48 in. 


26 in. 


31 in. 


34 in. 



(1) Door width is metal to metal. Clear widths would be less allowing for 
handrails end other elements. 



12 



Although the vehicle dimensions affect the size of the lift, within 
the specified minimum dimensions 90 to 95 percent of the wheelchair popu- 
lation can be accommodated. The dimensions in this guideline represents 
a realistic balance between the design limitations of current bus equip- 
ment and the wheelchair population. One class of wheelchairs that may be 
a problem are the newer three-wheeled models, which are longer than most 
other wheelchairs. 

The recommended dimensions assume adequate interior maneuverability 
within the vehicle. Limited maneuverability on the vehicle could require 
a wider lift to allow acceptable access. 

"Desired" dimensions are included in these guideline specifications. 
A user of these guidelines could provide cost offsets or other considera- 
tions for bidders providing lifts that meet or exceed the "desireo" 
dimensions. The "desired" dimensions also represent the consensus of the 
Advisory Panel in terms of the desired direction for the industry. In 
the future, lifts should have minimum widths of 32 inches and minimum 
lengths of 44 and 48 inches. 1 

The clear width between handrails is designed for the maximum width 
of wheelchair and allowance for a person to have clearance for hands on 
the rims of a wheelchair. j 



2.2.2 Surface 

The platform surface should be slip resistant under the conditions 
defined in Section 2.1.1. 

Rationale: A slip resistant surface reduces the potential for accidents 
for people standing on the lift and provides traction for a wheelchair. 



2.2.3 Protrusions 1 

When the lift barrier or roll stop is down, the platform should have 
no protrusions from the surface greater than 1/4 inch vertical rise or 
1/2 inch smooth transition rise (slope no greater than 1:2). ^ 

Rationale: When lift barrier or roll stop is down, movement on and off 
the platform should be easy and not inhibited by protrusions greater than 
1/4 inch vertical rise or 1/2 inch smooth transition rise from the sur- 
face. , These dimensions are adapted from the UFAS. ' 

Ii must be noted that the language, "when lift barrier or roll stop, 
is down," has been chosen to anow protrusions when the barrier or roll; 
stop is up. Lift manufacturers nave indicated that mecnanisms to hold ij 
the required outer barrier in pld:e may require protrusions through the j 
lift platform when the barrier is up. Such protrusions are allowable, j 
but should not limit the size or type of wheelchairs that can use a lift 



13. 



2.2.4 Gap Dimensions 

When a lift is in the loading position at the vehicle floor height, 
the gap between the lift platform and the vehicle floor should be at a 
minimum. In no case should the vertical distance exceed 5/8 inch and the 
horizontal distance exceed 1/2 inch. 

Rationale: A series of subjective tests reported in the VA specifica- 
tions established the 5/8 inch vertical gap as the highest that should be 
allowed. The 1/2 inch horizontal gap was chosen to limit the overall gap 
opening to approximately 3/4 inch. The preferred option is to have vir- 
tually no gap. 



2.2.5 Platform Deflection 

The lift platform should not deflect more than three (3) degrees in 
any direction when tested in accordance with Section 3.1.3. 

Rationale: To reduce the ability of a wheelchdir to gain additional 
speed and overcome the barrier or roll stop and to reduce the chance of a 
wheelchair tilting off the lift, a maximum deflection standard is estab- 
lished. The three (3) degree deflection is currently found in the 
California Administration Code. 



2.2.6 Edge Guards, Outer Barrier and Inner Roll Stop 

2.2.6.1 Edge guards should extend the length of the platform that 
operates outside of the vehicle. These edge guards shoii'd 
have a minimum height of one inch. 

2.2.6.2 The lift should have an outer barrier that retains a wheel- 
chair on the platform when the platform is above the ground 
loading position. 

2.2.6.3 The outer barrier should be designed to meet the test 
requirements of Section 3.1.6.1. 

2.2.6.4 The platform should have an inner roll stop; or the design 
of the lift should use a part of the vehicle as an inner 
roll stop. The inner roll s*>op should restrict the rolling 
movement of a wheelchair when the platform is in any oper- 
ating position other than at the vehicle floor loading 
position. 

2.2.6.5 The inner roll stop should be designed to meet the test 
requirements of Section 3.1.6.2. 



14 



2.2.6.6 The contractor should identify and clearly emphasize in the 
operations and maintenance manuals any barrier or roll stop 
adjustment or maintenance action that if done improperly 
could result in an unsafe condition. 

Rationale: Edge guards can prevent a wheelchair from accidentally slid- 
ing over the sides of the lift. Since edge guards are not in the direct 
path of a wheelchair using a lift, they are not designed to retain a 
wheelchair in direct forward or reverse motion but are designed to 
deflect tire direction. The one-inch height corresponds to that found in 
the California Administrative Code. 

In 1985, Garrett Engineers, Ir,c. conducted tests fcr the Southern 
California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD). These tests snowed thdt outer 
barriers on all existing passive wheelchair lifts could be overcoo'e by 
commonly available powered wheelchairs. The powered wheelchairs could 
ride over zhe outer barriers or push tnem down. SCRTD initiated these 
tests following an accident investigation that indicated a powered wheel- 
chair had defeated an outer barrier. 

The unsafe condition of an outer barrier not retaining a wheelchair 
on the platform is unacceptable. This guideline is intended to eliminate 
this unsafe condition. The tests described in Section 3.1.6.1 establish 
the limits for barrier operation. 

The Advisory Panel considered having the same reauirements for an 
"^nner barrier. However, transit operators reported no problems with the 
existing inner roll stop. Also, the accident scenarios involving running 
over the inner roll stop or off the inside of a ;ift apDeared to involve 
less risk of serious injury. Given these conditions, tne Advisory Par;el 
considered the requirements of a inner "barrier" lo be different from an 
outer barrier. The inner roll stop is designed lo stop inadvertent roll- 
ing of a wheelchair and provide an acceptable margin of safety. 

It is recognized that certain lift designs may obviate the need for 
a separate inner roll stop by using a solid part of the vehicle structure 
as the inner roll stop. In such a case, the vehicle structure will func- 
tion as the inner roll stop. 



2.2.7 Handrails 

2.2.7.1 When the lift if fully deployed, the platform should be 
equipped with a handrail on each side of the lift. 

2.2.7.2 The handrails should be 25 to 34 inches above the platform 
and should be a minimum 12 inches in length. 

2.2.7.3 The handrails should be capable of withstanding a hori- 
zontal force of 100 pounds concentrated at any point with- 
out permanent visible deforrriation. 



15 



2.2.1. ^ The handrails should be between I-l/^ and 1-1/? inches in 
diameter or width and should permit a full hcnd qrip with 
no less than 1-1/? inches of knuckle clearance. 

2.2.7.5 For wheelchair lifts that move in a arc motion, handrails 
should move with the lift. For wheelchair lifts that are 
of an elevator type, the handrails should be stationary or 
move with the lift. 

Rationale: For a person with mobility only on one side, two handrails 
allow boarding in either direction. Handrails on both sides of a lif': 
also limit lateral wheelchair movement. 

Handrails that move with s lift provide more of a sense of security 
from a user's point of view than stationary handrciiS attached to the 
vehicle. Stationary handrails in effect move relative to the motion of 
the lift and are noi as easy to gresp. However, stationary handrails 
currently in use have not beeti reported to be a major prob'iem. The Advi- 
sory Panel considered movable handrails preferable for arc lifts'." For 
elevator lifts stationary or movable handrails were considered 
acceptable. 

The vertical height dimensions and ihe lOC-pounu force requiremerit 
are adapted from the Canadian Standards Association standard. 



2.2.8 Platform Lighting 

When the lift is in operation, the platform should have a minimum of 
one (1) foot-candle of illumination. 

Rationale: Platform lighting provides for safer boardings wnen naturcl 
or other light is insufficient. The recommended level of illumination, is 
adapted from the White Book. 



2.2.9 Platform Markings 

2.2.9.1 The side edges, the outer edge, and the inner edge of the 
platform, or the inner edge of the floor of the bus adja- 
cent to the lift should be clearly marked in a color 
different from the lift platform. 

2.2.9.2 The lift may have a designated standing area for lift pas- 
sengers who are not in a wheelchair. 

Rationale: The marking of the platform edges wil " provide g>-eate"" visi- 
bility and reduce the potential for accidents. When standees are allowed 
on a lift, a desic-^ated standing area may be desirable. This standing 
area would be des'^cnated in a location to provide the passenger enhanced 
safety wher using ine lift. 



16 



2.2.10 Platform Seating (Optional) 

Mobility limited passengers who are not in a wheelchair should be 
provided a seat that enables them to be in a seated position when using 
the lift. The seat when not in use will not interfere with normal lift 
operations or decrease the available clear space below the minimum iden- 
tified in Section 2.2.1. The seat should be capable of holding a 95th 
percentile male and the force required to position the seat should not 
exceed five (5) pounds. 

Rationale: The option allows transit operators to provide extra comfort 
and safety for a person not in a wheelchair who is using the lift. Wien 
using the seat, a passenger will have better head clearance and bette" 
stability on the lift. The Advisory Panel conr.idered that this seat was 
optional and that the need for a seat was influenced by the type of lift. 
With the movement of an arc lift, a seat may provide a passenger with I 
more of a sense of safety. On an elevator type lift, the lift movement 
reduces the need for a seat to provide perceived safety. '* J 



2.3 Structural \ 

The structural elements of the wheelchair lift include those that support 
working loads and attach the lift to the vehicle. They do not include mechan- 
ical and hydraulic components associated with operation and control of the 
lift. I 



2.3.1 Lift Capacity j 

The wheelchair lift should have a lift capacity of 500 pounds uni- | 
form load. | 

Rationale: Discussion with wheelchair manufacturers indicated that the 1 
heavier, powered wheelchairs can weigh up to 250 pounds. The 99th per- I 
centile male weights approximately 241 pounds. A combined weight is 491 
pounds. Two 99th percentile males (one handicapped person and one atten- 
da't) combined with a heavy manual wheelchair would have a weight of 
approximately 540 pounds. The current wheelchair market would appear to 
be accommodated by a design load of 600 pounds. Moreover, although pow- 
ered wheelchairs may change, it is anticipated that the weight will not 
increase substantially. 

A combination of an attendant, a handicapped person and a powered 
wheelchair could yield loads approaching 750 pounds. However, this com- 
bination is not considerea an appropriate design standard. A heavy pow- 
ered wheelchair could occupy most of the platform and not allow room for 
a person to stand on a lift. Also, a powered wheelchair provides inde- 
pendent movement and reduces the need for an attendant. 



17 



2.3.2 Structural Safety Factor 

The structural safety factor should be at least three (3) based on 
the ultimate strength of the construction material. 

Rationale: In the "Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators," ANSI/ASME 
A17. 1-1984, the design safety factor for structural components varies 
depending on the function of the loaded member. They range from as high 
as 7.8 for bolts to as low as 2.2 for parts that are not considered crit- 
ical from a safety standpoint. These safety factors are for elevators 
traveling at speeds far above those of a wheelchair lift and allow for 
emergency stops and high acceleration forces. 

Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, Eighth Editio n 
suggests that good design practice calls for factors of safety of 1.5 to 
4.0 based on yield strength of the material. The materials specified in 
ANSI/ASME A17. 1-1984 have yield strengths of about one-half based on :he 
ultimate strength, so the Mark's safety factor can be reconciled with the 
"Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators." 

Recognizing that wheelchair lifts on transit vehicles are very slow 

moving relative to elevators, a design factor of three (3) has been 

selected. This is the same factor found in the California Adminisirative 
Code. 



2.3.3 Useful Life 

When used and maintained in accordance with manufacturer recommenaed 
procedures, a wheelchair lift structure should be designed to have; a use- 
ful life equal to the useful life of the vehicle on which it is used. 

Rationale: Once installed the lift becomes a part of the vehicle. As 
with other components of the vehicle, the lift with manufacturer recom- 
mended maintenance, including repair and replacement of parts, should be 
operable as long as the vehicle. Useful life of a standard size trani.it 
bus is 12 years. 



2.3.4 Materials 

Structural components should De made of steel or other durable con- 
struction material. 

2.3.4.1 Ferrous surfaces should be either plated with a protective 
coating or be cleaned, primed, and have a corrosion and 
abrasion resistant flat finish. 

2.3.4.2 Nonferrous and nonmetallic surfaces should be coated using 
a durable flat or matte finish. 



18 



2.3.4.3 Stainless steel does not require coating or surface 
treatment. 

Rationale: The structural components of the lift should have a useful 
life equal to that of the vehicle upon which it is mounted. The mate- 
rials and coatings identified in these guidelines are intended to ensure 
the useful life. Discussions of the Advisory Panel included using a rjalt 
spray test or paint thickness measure to ensure compliance. No specific 
tests have been designated in order to allow manufacturers flexibility, 
recognizing that the overall goal is to have materials lasting the useful 
life of the vehicle. 



2.3.5 Interface with the Vehicle 



2.3.5.1 The interface with the vehicle should have the structural 
strength required for in situ static loading of the lift 
platform to 1,800 pounds (three times the lift capacity). 

2.3.5.2 Installation of the wheelchair lift should not reduce or in 
any way compromise the structural integrity of the vehicle. 

2.3.5.3 Attachment of the wheelchair lift, including any modifica- 
tion of the vehicle, should not cause an imbalance of the 
vehicle that will adversely affect vehicle handling 
characteristics. 



2.3.5.4 No part of the installed and stowed lift should extend into 
the stepwell, laterally beyond the normal side contour of 
the vehicle, or in any way violate the specified approach 
or breakover angle of the vehicle. 

2.3.5.5 The stowed lift should not inhibit the operation of the 
vehicle door; and there should be no contact or rubbing 
between the opened door and/or the door frame that would 
damage the door or the lift during deployment and normal 
operation of the lift. 



Rationale: The structural safety factor of the lift is three (2) and the 
designated lift capacity is 600 pounds. This section requires that the 
lift interface with the bus have the same design safety factor as the 
lift structure. 



The design of a wheelchair lift dictates the required space for 
installation. The bus manufacturer has the responsibility to determine 
compatibility of the bus structural design and the selected lift. 

Protrusions both inside and outside the bus pose potential hazards ! 

for passengers. The potential of damage to the lift is also increased ! 

when parts of the lift protrude outside the bus. Section 2.3.5.4 pro- j 

hibits prot.rusions in the stepwell or on the sides of the bus. Also, the • 
lift should not protrude from underneath the bus and adversely affect the 



19 



approach cr brea^;ove^ angles. This requirement includes protrusions that 
result frcm the drifting of the lift. Drifting should be prevented 
through lift des'gn, mechanical lock or detent. 

Interlocks that prevent lift operation unless a vehicle door is open 
are induced in these guideline specifications. Observations at public 
transportation operations indicated that door adjustments or improper 
lift installatior' can result in interference between the lift and the 
door., This guideline specification does not allow such an operating :on- 
dition. CDHCurrently , it encourages increased door clearances and/or 
more precision ir the lift operation. The specification does not prcii- 
bit the us2 of brushes or other devices that are designed to allow co i- 
tact between the door and lift. 



2.4 Mechanical and Hydraulic 

Mechanical and hydraulic components include all parts of the lift, -drive 
or control system that are subject to wear and degradation due to the opera- 
tion of the lift. 



2.4.1 Mechanical and Hydraulic Safety Factors 

2.4.1.1 The mechanical component safety factor should be at lea;t 
six (6) based on the ultimate strength of the material. 

2.4.1.2 All hydraulic hoses should comply with SAE Standards JTiO 
(Power Steering Pressure Hose — Wire Braided) and J191 
(Power Steering Pressure Hose — Low Volumetric Expansion 
Type). 

2.4.1.3. All components that contain hydraulic fluid should have a 
minimum burst pressure of five (5) times nonnel C;?3igR 
wording pressure. 

Rationale: The mechanical safety factor is in agreement with the 
California Administrative Code. Also, "Safety Standards for Manlifts." 
ANSI A90. 1-1976 s^iates that all parts of the machine shall have a safety 
factor of six (5) based on a full load. Although the wheelchair lift 
operates at a lower velocity and it should be subjected to less severe 
shock loads than d manlift, a safety factor of 6 is considered 
appropriate . 

The hydraulic safety factors are based on SAE standards for hose and 
ANSI/ASME A17. 1-1984, Safety Code for Elevators ana Escalators, Part HI 
Hydraulic Elevators. Part III requires safety factors of 5 on hydrau". ic 
cylinders, piping., and valves. 



20 



2.4.2 Platform Free Fall Limits 

The platform loaded with the design load should free-fall no faster 
than twice the normal descent rate, as specified in Section 2.5.11.1, in 
the event of any power or equipment ff ilure during lift operation. 

Rationale: Twice the normal descent rate stated in Section 2.5.11.1 is 
12 inches per second. The Californid Administrative Code allows platform 
motion at up to 11.8 inches per second in normal operation and twice this 
speed in free-fall. Therefore, the free-fall speed specified here is 
approximately one half that of the California regulation. 



2.4.3 Hydraulic Power Source '.use- one of the following options) 

(Option A) The hydraulic power source for the lift should be the 

vehicle power steering pjmp or another existing jiydrau- 
lic power source on the vehicle. 

(Option B) The lift hydraulic system shall be independent and shall 
operate the lift — (*) — percent of design speeds at a 
minimum temperature of — (*) — F. 

* To be completed by Procuring Agency. 

Rationale: Cold weather affects the operation of the hydraulic systeiris 
on current lifts. Where cold weather is not a problem. Option A can be 
used in lift specifications. When cold weather conditions are expected 
to affect the operation of the lift. Option B can be used to specify an 
independent hydraulic system that will function in cold weather. This 
separate system could be driven by the power steering pump. 



2.5 Control Systems 



2.5.1 Control Console 



2.5.1.1 The lift controls should be located on a console and shall 
consist of a power switch, a function selection switch, and 
an operating switch. 

2.5.1.2 The control console should be located in a position where 
the lift oparcLor (driver) has a direct unobstructed view 
of the platform during lift operation and should be secure 
from operation or tampering by unauthorized individuals. 

2.5.1.3 The control console should have simple instructions on or 
near it that directs the operator in the lift operating 
procedures. 



21 



2.5.1.4 The switches on the control console should by their loca- 
tion or by other means prohibit simultaneous, one-handed 
operation of more than one switch. 

Rationale: Discussions with public transportation operators indicated 
that lift operator error contributes to a significant proportion of lift 
accidents and cause maintenance and reliability problems. Several fac- 
tors contribute to lift operator error--infrequent use of the lift, dif- 
ferent controls for different lifts, and lack of follow-up training. One 
means to reduce operator error is to make lift control systems function- 
ally standard and simple. These guideline specifications seek to do 
this. 

The first step is to have the lift operation controlled by three 
switches, which operate as described in Sections 2.5.2 to 2.5.4. For 
safety reasons the operator must have a clear view of the movement of the 
lift when it is in operation. This requirement means that the console 
for a rear door lift must be located near the rear door and be secure 
from unauthorized access. To assist in reducing operator error, simple 
instructions for the lift operator should be available. 

Simultaneous, one-handed operation has been identified as a source 
of operator error. Proper positioning of the switches or other means can 
eliminate this source of driver error. 



2.5.2 Power Switch 

The lift controls should have a power switch with two positions— on 
and off. The "on" position enables lift operation and should be desig- 
nated by a lighted indicator. The "off" position prevents lift movement. 

Rationale: The power switch must be "on" to operate the lift. This 
switch enables the function selection and the operating switches. This 
switch is considered important for the safe design of the control logic, 
especially since it can also act as a back-up, emergency "off" switch. 
The requirement for a lighted indicator is to allow the driver to discern 
the status of the power switch. 



2.5.3 Control Function Selection Switch 

2.5.3.1 The lift controls should have a function selection switch 
to designate the desired lift function. The switch shall 
have at least five designated functions (as defined) in the 
following order: 

(1) Off - no function can be activated 

(2) Deploy - lift is operated from a stowed position to a 
platform position 

(3) Down - lowers lift platform 
(A) Up - raises lift platform 



zz 



(5) Stow - lift is operated from a platform position to a 
stowed position. 

2.5.3.2 The lift may have four optional functions— outer barrier 
down, outer barrier up, roll stop down, and roll stop up. 
If any one or more of these functions are included, their 
order on the function switch shall be as follows: 



(1 

(2 
(3 
(4 
(5 
(6 
(7 
(8 
(9 



Off 

Deploy 
Down 

Outer Barrier Down - lowers outer barrier 
Outer Barrier Up - raises outer barrier 
Up 

Roll Stop Down - lower inner roll stop 
Roll Stop Up - raises inner roll stop 
Stow 



2.5.3.3 The function selection switch should not allow the selec- 
tion of more than one function at one time. 



Rationale: The control selection switch specification identifies func- 
tions for a lift and defines these functions. Existing lifts designate 
functions with various terms. This specification identifies the term;; 
that should appear on lifts produced by any manufacturer. 

A distinction is made between recommended functions and optional 
functions. The recommended functions are considered the minimum accept- 
able for operation. Existing lifts have barriers or roll stops con- 
trolled either automatically or by driver action. The specification 
allows both options. The minimum designated functions assume roll stop 
automatic barrier functions. 



The sequence for listing the mandatory and optional functions has. 
been chosen to provide more standardization. The switch itself may be 
different (e.g., rotary, lever, or pushbutton); but the order of the 
functions remains the same. A lift operator can expect identical func- 
tional relationships, although the control switches may be different. 
Section 2.5.3.3 provides for increased safety and reliability in the lift 
operation by having only one function selected at a time. 

The Advisory Panel also discussed having an interlock that would 
prevent the function selection switch from being changed when the operat- 
ing switch is activated. Some members considered this option expensive 
and redundant with other safety features in the specifications. For 
'hese reasons such an interlock was not included. 



23 



2.5.4 Control Operating Switch 

2.5.4.1 The lift controls should have an operating switch labeled 
"Operate" that will activate the designated function for 
the lift. 

2.5.4.2 The operating switch should require continuous force to 
perform the selected function. 

2.5.4.3 Release of the operating switch should stop the lift 
motion. 

Rationale: The third type of switch on the control console is an operat- 
ing switch. This switch will allow the lift to perform the designated 
function. For safety reasons, it is a momentary-type switch that 
requires continuous force for operation. If a driver is disabled or 
wants to stop the lift immediately, the only required action is the 
release of the switch. The lift operator should be able to stop arid 
change to any control function in order to adjust to operating condi- 
tions, safety hazards, or passenger requests. The momentary nature of 
the operating switch in combination with the function switch provides 
this control capability. 



2.5.5 Design Safety 

The control system should be designed to be fail-safe for single 
failure modes that would negate the proper operations of the interlocks 
specified in Section 2.5.8. A complete failure modes and effects analy- 
sis (FMEA) that demonstrates these design requirements have been met 
should be provided. 

Rationale: Safe operation is a primary concern of the guideline specifi- 
cations. The safety protection for some operator errors and equipment 
failures resides in the integrity of the Interlocks and Safety Feature;s 
of Section 2.5.8. The safety of the lift/vehicle system is enhanced by 
requiring that the interlocks remain in a known safe state under condi- 
tions of any single failure of the control system or loss of power to the 
control system. 

An FMEA is a frequently used method in safety analysis to demon- 
strate what a design will do under selected failure modes. There are 
many reports and papers explaining FMEA. Three such reports are: 

(1) Dussault, N. B. "The Evolution and Practical Applications of 
Failure Modes and Effects Analyses," RADC-TR-83-72. March 
1983. 

(2) MIL-STD-7858, Sept. 15, 1980, "Reliability Program for Systems 
and Equipment Development and Production," Task 204, Failure 
Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA). 



24 



(3) ARP 926 A, "Fault/Failure Analysis Procedure," SAE Aerospace 
Recommended Practice," Rev. 11-15-79. 

The first reference is a report that discusses several methods. The 
second reference is a Military standard that is used in many de^'ense sys- 
tem developments. The third reference is a SAE Recommended Practice used 
in the aerospace industry. 



2.5.6 Jacking Prevention 

The control system or inherent lift design should prevent the opera- 
tion of the 11ft from jacking the bus and causing damage to the bus or 
the 11ft. 

Rationale: Jacking is the support or lifting of the bus by the wheel- 
chair lift when the platform is power driven into the ground. The 
release of load from the bus when the occupied platform contacts the 
ground is sometimes mistakenly considered jacking. Early models of some 
passive lifts did result in jacking and damaging to the lift or bus. To 
prevent such damage the control system or inherent lift design should not 
allow jacking. 



2.5.7 Manual Operation 

The lift should have a manual method of operation permitting an 
operator to lower the platform to ground level from any position in its 
cycle with a wheelchair occupant. It should also be possible to raise an 
unoccupied platform, and to stow the lift. The outer barrier and inner 
roll stop should be functional and controllable when the lift is in the 
manual mode. 

Rationale: In the event of a power failure the lift must have a manual 
backup system. To accommodate passengers the manual system will be able 
to be used to take passengers off the vehicle. Also, the manual opera- 
tion will allow the lift to be stowed in order for the vehicle to move. 
For safety reasons, the barriers and inner roll stop would be operable. 



2.5.8 Interlocks and Safety Features 

2.5.8.1 Interlocks should prevent vehicle movement unless the lift 
is stowed. 

2.5.8.2 Interlocks should prevent lift activation and operation 
unless the vehicle is stopped and inhibited from moving and 
the appropriate door is open. 

2.5.8.3 An interlock or inherent design feature should prevent 
stowing of the lift when the platform is occupied. 



25 



An interlock or inherent design feature should not allow a 
lift to move up or down unless the inner roll stop and 
outer barrier are raised and operational. 

2.5.f.5 An interlock or inherent design feature should not allow 

the; outer barrier to be lowered unless the lift platform is 
at an unloading surface below the vehicle floor level. 

Rationale: The interlocks and Safety features are designed to prever t 
unsafe conditions. The first interlock guideline p''events vehicle mc /e- 
ment when i passenger is on a lift or when the lift extends beyond tf"B 
normal width of the vehicle. The second interlock prevents lift movenent 
unless the vehicle is appropriately inhibited from moving and th-:^ lif: 
can [)e deployed through an open doo". This interlock reduces unsafe pas- 
senger conditions and damage to the "lift or vehicle. 

One s if ety hazard identified with lift operations is going into a 
stow position when a lift is occupied. The control system or the^.inher- 
ent design of the lift would prevent this condition. 

Barrier or roll stop failure can create a hazardous condition. To 
prevent this condition the lift should not be able ':o operate ud or d^wn 
unless the inner roll stop and outer barrier are up and working prope-ly. 

Similarly, the lift operator cannot inadvertently lower the oute ^ 
barrier unless the platform is at an unloading su^-face. This f'^ature 
means the platform would have to be at ground level or on a r.ur'ace t lat 
allows safe boarding and a lighting. 



2.5.9 Kai itenance Controls (Optional) 

The 1 ift should have a separate maintenance control that allows com- 
plete lift operation, is inaccessible auring normal vehicle operation, 
and is locited in a functional position for maintenance of the lift. The 
design of .he maintenance controls should ensure all safety features t-f 
lift operations wnen the maintenance controls are not in use. 

Rationale: The control requirements for normal operation and mai ntenance 
are differ! nt depending on console location and maintenance access. ~o 
assist in 'he mai itenance of the lift, it is suggested that separate 
maintenance controls be provided. However, this recuirement is optional. 
An operator will nave to decioe whether the initial cost for such con- 
tro"!s will be offset by reduceo maintenance costs. 



2.5.10 Wiring 

Wiring should be in accordance with SAE Recommended Practice SAE 
J1292 OCT 81 and ^^eferenced Standards, except when good engineering prac- 
tice dictates special conductor insulations. 



26 



Rationale: The SAE Recommended Practice, "Automobile, Truck, Truck- 
Tractor, Trailer, and Motor Coach Wiring," is accepted by the automotive 
industry and provides a baselin^:' for design. The practice recognizes 
that unique design will require engineering practices that cannot be 
envisioned and incorporated into a recommended practice. 



2.5.11 Lift Operational Requirements 

2.5.11.1 The maximum speed of platfonn motion should be 6 inches 
per second. The operating time required to fully cycle 
the lift (deploy, down, up, and slow with barrier opera- 
tion) should not exceed 45 seconds at 20 F and not exceed 
65 seconds at -10 F. 

2.5.11.2 The maximum platfonn horizontal and vertical acceleration 
shall be 0.2g. 

Rationale: Lift operating speeds and cycle times are set in the White 
Book as 5 seconds to deploy or stow and 15 seconds to raise or lower a 
passenger. Many t'-ansit operators consider this much too fast for the 
comfort and safety of the wheelchair occupant. The California Admini- 
strative Code allows platfcrm motion at up to 11.8 inches per second. 
This rate was considered fast by the Advisory Panel. The transit author- 
ity bid packages reviewed have specified speeds and velocities in a wide 
variety of ways. The speeds and operating times specified here are 
designed to be compatible with existing condition, acceptable to the 
wheelchair occupant, and should not place new design requirements on "-.ue 
lift manufacturer. 

" Safety Guidelines for Wheelchair Lifts on Public Transit Vehicle s" 
states that vertical and horizontal acceleration rates shall not exceed 
0.3g. The specified value of acceleration permitted in this section is 
lower and provides more desirable conditions for the lift user with very 
little increase in operating cycle time. 

The above referenced report also recommends that the rate for jerk, 
the rate of change of acceleration, not exceed 0.3g/second throughout the 
horizontal motion of the occupied lift platform. The Advisory Panel cis- 
cussed the rate of jerk. However, little data could be identified the.t 
would guide the establishment of a rate for jerk. Both 0.2g/second ard 
0.3g/second were discussed. Given the lack of data, the Advisory Panel 
made no recommendation in this area. 



3.0 TESTING, CERTIFICATION, AND INSPECTION 



3.1 Design Tests 

The tests defined in Section 3.1 shell be performed on a representative 
production unit of the wheelchair lift model purchased by this procurement. 



27 



Unless otherwise specified, the lift should meet the requirements given in 
Section 2.0 when attached to a fixture that simulates a vehicle installation 
and when supplied by electric, hydraulic, air, or other power source of output 
equal to that normally available on the vehicle. Only one representative pro- 
duction unit is required to be tested for certification for design tests 3.1.1 
through 3.1.7. Design tests 3.1.1 through 3.1.5 should be conducted on the 
same unit, without failure, in the order given, and without any repairs or 
maintenance other than that permitted by Section 3.1.11. The contractor may 
elect to conduct the tests specified in Section 3.1.6 with the lift installed 
in a vehicle. Design tests 3.1.8 and 3.1.9 require a lift model and vehicle 
model combination. For certification these tests need only be conducted once 
for each li^t and vehicle model combination. 



3.1.1 Durability Tests 



3.1.1.1 Vertical Cycling Test. The lift platform should be oper- 
ated up and then down through its maximum vertical operat- 
ing range for 15,600 cycles with a load of 600 pound's for 
the first 600 cycles and 400 pounds for the remaining 
cycles. The ambient temperature for the first half of the 
cycles in each of these tests should be at least 110 F. 
The tests may be continuous or separated into groups or not 
less than 10 cycles with nonoperating periods of not more 
than one minute between each cycle in the group. The plat- 
form should raise and lower smoothly throughout the test 
with vertical and horizontal accelerations not exceeding 
0.2g. 

3.1.1.2 Deployment Cycling Test. The lift platform should be 
deployed and stowed for 10,000 cycles. The ambient temper- 
ature for the first half of the cycles should be at least 
110 F. The tests may be continuous or separated into 
groups and may have nonoperating periods between cycles as 
specified in Section 3.1.1.1. 

3.1.1.3 Combination Vertical and Deployment Cycling Test. The 
tests in Sections 3.1.1.1 and 3.1.1.2 may be combined into 
a single test that meets the requirements or both tests. 

Rationale: The tests in Section 3.1.1.1 and 3.1.1.2 are adapted from 
those required by the California Administrative Code. Section 3.1.1.3 
has been added to accommodate manufacturers equipped to conduct the tests 
simultaneoi'sly. 

Note that the language in Section 3.1 does not mean that a manufac- 
turer must perform these tests for each procurement. Once a production 
unit of a specific lift model and vehicle comMnaticn has t-:;en tested, 
the design tests apply to all procurements of that combination. 



28 



3.1.2 Low Temperature Operation Test 

After 16 hours of exposure to a temperature not higher than 20 F, 
the wheelchair lift should be operated unloaded through 10 cycles of 
deploying, lowering, raising, and stowing and through 10 cycles of rais- 
ing and lowering with a 500-pound load. Each cycle should be separated 
by at least a 30-minute cooling period at a temperature not higher than 
20 F. The lift should meet all performance requirements while operating 
at exposure temperatures. 

Rationale: The above test is a modification of the low temperature test 
of the California Administrative Code. The major changes were to extend 
the soak time to correspond to an overnight storoge at a low temperature, 
to increas'5 the test weight to the 6C;0 pound limit contained in these 
specifications, explicitly to requ'r-e the lift to meet all performance 
requirements at tne test temperature, and to change the cycling to avoid 
loading and unloading the lift during the test. 



3.1.3 Platform Deflection Test 

A static load of 500 pounds should be applied through the centroid 
of a test pallet 24 inches by 24 inches placed at the centroid of the 
platform. The platform should be raised and lowered with this weight. 
During the lift operation the platform should not deflect more than three 
degrees in any direction between the loaded position and its unloaded 
position. 

Rationale: The California Administrative Code has a platform deflection 
requirement. For the guideline specifications platform deflection has 
been defined in terms of test requirements. The test requirement have 
been developed based on the design load and the platform deflection 
requirement in the California Administrative Code. 



3.1.4 Self-Damage Tests 

The controls should be held in operating position for five (5) sec- 
onds after the unloaded lift meets resistance to its travel under each 
control position with any limit switch disabled. The test should be per- 
formed twice at each lift position of deploy, stow, full up at floor 
level, and full down at ground level. 

Rationale: Section 3.1.^ is adapted from the California Administrative 
Code. 



29 



3.1.5 Power and Equipment Failure Test 

A failure of power, chain, cable, hydraulic hose, or air hose thdt 
allows the lift to deploy or the platform to lower should be simulated. 
The wheelchair lift should comply with Section 2.4.2 during this test. 
An FMEA may be provided in lieu of conducting actual tests. 

Rationale: Section 3.1.5 is adapted from the California Administrative 
Code. It allows an FMEA to be used in place of actual testing. Such an 
analysis examines the consequences of failures such as those specified 
for simulation. 



3.1.6 Barrier and Roll Stop Tests 

3.1.6.1 The contractor should test the ability of the outer barrier 
to retain a powered wheelchair. Two of four wheelchairs 
are to be tested. The Everest and Jennings 3M Marathon or 
the Invacare Power Rolls Arrow Model 4M929E and the Everest 
and Jennings Explorer Modular Power Chair, or the Fortress 
Scientific 655 should be used. The two wheelchairs and 
secured load should not leave the platform and the outer 
barrier should not be defeated (driven through or climbed 
over) by the wheelchairs when tested under all of the fol- 
lowing conditions: 

(a) fully charged battery system 

(b) equivalent occupant loads of both 110 and 250 pounds 

(c) operated both forwards and backwards 

(d) accelerated at full power from a starting position off 
of the lift platform and a minimum of 48 inches 
between the front edge of the foot rests or rim of the 
rear tires and the outer barrier 

(e) a platform positioned with an 8 degree outward slope 

(f) the lift platform in a raised position. 

The Everest and Jennings 3M Marathon or the Invacare Pov/er 
Rolls Arrow Model should be equipped with a standard adult 
size seat, standard foot rests, 20-inch rear wheels, eight- 
inch front castors, and a standard upright back. The 
Everest and Jennings Explorer Modular Power Chair or the 
Fortress Scientific 655 should be equipped with all the 
above features, except that the front and rear tires should 
be 10 inches in diameter and the seating option and batter- 
ies should result in a gross wheelchair weight at or 
exceeding 210 pounds. 

3.1.6.2 The contractor should test the ability of the inner roll 

stop to prevent a wheelchair from inadvertently rolling off 
the platform. In its raised position the roll stop should 
withstand a total force of at least 300 pounds parallel to 
the platform surface in the unloading direction. The force 



30 



should be applied at a minimum height of 2-1/2 inches above 
the top surface of the platform with 150 pounds at each of 
two points 11.8 inches on each side of the center of the 
roll stop. 

Rationale: As discussed in the rationale for Section 2.2.6, existing 
barriers have failed in tests using powered wheelchairs. This test of 
the outer barrier is designed to ensure that barriers do not fail under 
the test conditions and that a wheelchair and secured occupant could 
remain on the platform. 

The four models represent two types of current wheelchairs that are 
powered and could override barriers. They have been selected because 
they have been identified as representing those wheelchair models that 
are currently available and produce high and possibly the highest amounts 
of force that could overcome a barrier. 

Specific models of wheelchairs have been chosen to standardize this 
test and to make transit operators aware of the limits of the test. A 
transit operator faced with transporting wheelchairs more powerful than 
those mentioned (e.g. specially designed wheelchairs) will be faced with 
different safety and risk levels. 

The wheelchairs are to be tested with two different weights. The 
110 pound represents a 5th percentile woman. With this lighter load, a 
wheelchair would be more susceptible to climbing or bouncing over a bar- 
rier. The 250 pound load represents a 99th percentile male, the standard 
used in defining the design load. The heavier weight will test the abil- 
ity of a wheelchair to be powered through a barrier. 

The 48 inch distance is longer than the maximum allowable platfor-m 
length and less than the combined platform length and interior clear dis- 
tance found on the same bus models. The 48 inches is considered a ree- 
sonable test distance. 

The test in Section 3.1.6.1 is recommended as an interim test by the 
Advisory Panel. The Advisory Panel also recommends that more precise 
test requirements be developed that identify specific forces, angles, and 
other factors to be tested. These requirements would simulate conditions 
described in Section 3.1.6.1 and provide a more definitive test procecure 
and guideline. 

The roll stop test specified in Section 3.1.6.2 is adapted from that 
currently required for an outward barrier under the California Admini- 
strative Cc'de. This test appears designed to prevent inadvertent rolling 
off of a platform. The 2-1/2 inch test height requires a minimum roll 
stop height of 2-1/2 inches. This is the same height required by the 
CSA. The California Administrative code and the VA require minimum roll 
stop heights of three inches or more. VA tests showed that under simu- 
lated lift conditions, a wheelchair could roll over a 2-inch barrier but 
be stopped by a 3-inch barrier. The 2-1/2-inch barrier is accepted by 



31 



CSA and corresponds to the height at which clear length is measured (see 
Section 2.2.1.3). 



3.1.7 Static Load Test 

A static load of 1800 pounds should be applied through the centroid 
of a test pallet placed at the ceritroid of the platform when the platform 
is positioned at its raised position. The length and width dimensions of 
the test pallet should be 24 inches by 24 inches to correspond to the 
approximate outer dimensions of a wheelchair "footprint." The load 
should remain on the platform not less than tv/o (2) minutes. After tlie 
load is removed, an inspection should be made to determine if fractures 
have occurred. 

Rationale: The test given in Section 3.1.7 is adapted from the 
California Administrative Code. Section 3.1.7 was modified to specify a 
time period for the test. The two-min'Jte period is the same as trvat 
specified by the VA. 



3.1.8 Vehicle Interface Test 

This test should be conducted on a lift installed in an actual ve;hi- 
cle of the same model as being purchased through this procurement. A 
static load of 900 pounds should be applied through the centroid of a 
t2st pallet placed at the centroid of the platform when the platform is 
positioned at its raised position. The length and width dimensions of 
the test pallet should be 24 inches by 24 inches. The load should rerr.ain 
on the platform not less than two (2) minutes. 

Rationale: Section 3.1.8 has been developed for these guideline speci:"i- 
cations and tests the structural interface between the vehicle and the 
lift. 



3.1.9 Interlock Safety Tests 

The Contractor should submit a test plan for approval by the Procur- 
ing Agency or certification of zests that demonstrate that the lift 
model, when installed in the venicle model, meets the safety related, 
interlocks as given in Section 2.5.8. 

Rationale: This test wvl aemonstrate the level of saf=:y provided by 
the lift interlocks. 



3.1.10 Visual Inspection 

At the conclusion of any test described in Section 3.1 — except Sec- 
tions 3.1.6 and 3.1.7 — with all loads removed, the parts of the wheel- 
chair ift should show nc condition of fracture, pennanent defonndtion. 



22 



wear that would exceed manufacturer's tolerances, perceptible impairifent , 
or other deterioration that would be dangerous. 

Rationale: Section 3.1.10 is adapted from the California Administrative 
Code. The visual inspection is a means to determine if the tests have 
been passed. 

3.1.11 Maintenance During Tests 

During the Durability Tests of Section 3.1.1, the inspection, lubri- 
cation, maintenance, and replacement of parts (other than bulbs and 
fuses) may be performed only as specified in the contractor's maintenance 
manual for the lift and at intervals no more frequent than specified in 
the manual. Maintenance specified for certain time intervals should be 
performed during the vertical cycling and deployment cycling tests at a 
number of cycles that is in the same proportion to the total cycles as 
the maintenance period is to 36 months. 

Rationale: Section 3.1.11 is taken from the California Administrative 
Code. Scheduled maintenance is permitted during the tests, and parts 
scheduled for replacement can be replaced. However, if replacement or 
other parts fail during the tests, the test would have to be repeated. 



3.1.12 Certification 

The contractor should provide written certification of compliance of 
the tests specified in Section 3.1, Design Tests. 

Rationale: This is a standard practice in design testing. 



3.2 Acceptance Tests (Optional) 

The contractor should submit for approval to the Procuring Agency a test 
plan to demonstrate that the lifts purchased by this procurement meet the 
requirements given in Section 2.0, unless otherwise tested in Section 3.1. The 
Procuring Agency may witness any or all of these acceptance tests. A mutually 
agreed upon notification time prior to the conduct of a test should be made 
between the two parties. The test results should be recorded, witnessed, and 
submitted to the Procuring Agency as proof of meeting the acceptance criteria 
of the approved test plan. 

Rationale: This section is optional since most lifts would be purchased 
as a part O" a vehicle procurement and any lift acceptance testing would 
be included in the vehicle acceptance testing. Acceptance testing needs 
to be considered as a separate price item in the lift procurement. The 
more comprehensive the acceptance lests, the more expensive this option 
can be to the Procuring Agency. The successful completion of acceptance 
tests is the time at which the warranty period normally begins. 



33 



3.3 Environmental Tests 

The contractor should provide the Procuring Agency with (1) certified 
documentation to lift performance in revenue service in transit environments 
similar to those that will be encountered or (2) certified documentation of 
tests that demonstrate that the lift should function reliably in the transit 
operating environment. 

Rationale: Tests described in Sections 3.1 and 3.2 are conducted in lab- 
oratory or test conditions that do not attempt to simulate a revenue ser- 
vice, transit environment. The Advisory Panel concluded that a lift 
should not be put into regular revenue service until it has been tested 
to determine the effects of dirt, water, salt, ice, road conditions, and 
other in-service environmental factors on reliability and service life. 




1 



i 



i 



COMMENTS SHLEl 



These guideline specifications are an industry document developed by pro 
fessionals familiar with accessible transportation. The document is consid- 
ered to be an important step in the evolution of accessible transportation. 
However, it is not the final step. It is anticipated that operational experi 
ences and technology advancements will indicate areas where these guidelines 
can be improved. Your comments and suggested changes are solicited. Please 
use this comments sheet to forward your comments to: 

Mr. George Izumi 

Department of Transportation 

Urban Mass Transportation Administration 

Office of Bus and Paratransit Systems/URT-20 

400 7th Street, S.W., Room 6424 

Washington, D.C. 20590 



Comments: (When referring to specific sections of the guideline specifica- 
tions, please identify the section number and title.) 



National Workshop on 
Bus-Wheelchair Accessibility 



Guideline Specifications for 
Wheelchair Ramps 



May 7-9, 1986 
Seattle, Washington 



Prepared by 

Battelle Columbus Division 
505 King Avenue 
Columbus, Ohio 43201 

Prepared for 

Office of Bus and Paratransit Systems 
Urban Mass Transportation Administration 
Washington, D.C. 20590 



■I! 



1 

I 

I 

1 

! 

I 




ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



These guideline specifications are the culmination of many hours of hard work 
by persons representing all facets of the accessible transit and paratransit 
industry. The Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) recognized that 
the technology associated with accessible transportation could be improved 
and sponsored an Advisory Panel in order to develop industry guideline specifi- 
cations. Representing different viewpoints and different interests, the members 
of the Advisory Panel met, discussed issues, and developed these guideline 
specifications. It is a credit to the Advisory Panel and the dedication of 
its members that a formal vote never hcio to be taken and ihat the guideline 
specifications were developed on the basis of consensus. 

Several people need to be acknowledged for the assistance they provided to 
the Advisory Panel in the development o"" ihrse guidelines. George I. Izumi, 
the UMTA Project Manager, was responsible -^or- planning and organizing the 
Advisory Panel, planning for the Workshop, and contributed q^-eatly to the 
development of the guidelines. Vincent R. DeMarco, tne UKlf- Program Manager, 
was responsible for guiding the efforts of the Acvisory Panel and for planning 
and conducting the Workshop. Two other persons from the U.S. Department 'of 
Transportation also provided assistance. Christina Chang of the Transportation 
Systems Center helped to organize and run the Workshop and prepare Workshop 
Proceedings. Scott York of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
participated in the Advisory Panel meetings and assisted in cla'-ifying certain 
safety issues. The Battel le project team of Gerald A. Francis (consultant), 
Martin Gombe^t (ATE Management and Service Company, Inc.), Roll and b . King, 
and David i,. Norstrom was responsible for developing the draft guideline 
specific cions anc serving as a technical resource to the Advisory Panel. 
Speci?" recognition is given to Mr. Norstrom who skillfully manageo tne 
guid ine development procesi" and led the discussions of the Adviso^-y Panel 
mer ings that obtained a general consensus of the Advisory Panel on each 
guideline subject. Finally, appreciation goes to each member of the Advisory 
Panel who gave of their time and contributed their expertise to the development 
of these industry guidelines. 



PREFACE 



On September 17, 1985, the Administrator, Ralph L. Stanley, of the Urban Mas! 
Transportation Administration called together a meeting with representatives 
of transit agencies, handicapped organizations, rehabilitation specialists 
and manufacturers of buses and wheelchair lifts to hear first hand the problems 
and issues regarding transit bus wheelchair accessibility. As a result of 
this meeting, the Administrator requested that an UMTA Advisory Panel be formed 
to plan a National Bus Wheelchair Accessibility Workshop and to guide the 
development of a set of guideline specifications for the equipment required 
for transit bus and paratransit vehicle wheelchair accessibility. A contract 
was issued to Battel le to assist UMTA in this effort. 

As a result of surveying the transit industry for input and meeting with the 
Advisory Panel, Battel le prepared a draft set of guideline specifications for 
wheelchair lifts, securement devices and r^mps for presentation and discussion 
at the National Bus Wheelchair Accessibility' Workshop held in Seattle, 
Wasninpion, on May 7 through 9, 1985, Using the inputs developed during the 
Workshop and the written comments submitted following the Workshop, the 
Advisory Panel prepared these final guideline specifications. 

These guideline sf)ecif ications are advisory in nature. The intention of tne 
guideline specifications is to provide transit agencies with a model that they 
could use, as appropriate, in the development of their specifications for 
wheelchair accessibility. In the guideline specifications, where the word 
"should" is used, the recommencction of the Advisory Panel is that the 
suggested item or value be included in a general specification. Where the 
word "may" is used, the Advisory Panel recommends that the item or choice of 
values be considered for inclusion based upon ]czi' i^'ilnr ' •■''■^■"i:;n- 
The Ad\'isory Panel has developed these guidelines Tur use tnrojy.ioui trie united 
States. It recognizes that unique local conditions could ma!:: an item suggested 
for inclusion inappropriate and a local public transportation provider would 
be required to make the appropriaie changes (e.g. to accommoocte extreme 
environmental conditions). 

This guideline specification is one of four specifications developed by /he 
Advisory Panel, which developed separate guideline specifications for passive 
wheelchair lifts (those used primarily on transit buses), active wheelchair 
lifts (those used jrimarily on paratransit vehicles), ramps and securement 
devices. Members cf the Advisory Panel participated actively in the develop- 
r^ent of each individual guideline soecifi cation basec upon their experience 
and interest. Although the Advisory Panel discussed many related accessibi 1 i ":y 
issues, these guideline specifications focus only on the tecnnical requirements 
of a specific piece of equipment, "^hey have been prepared to assist in the 
purchase of such equipment either separately or as part of an overall vehicle 
Drocurement . 



i i i 



ADVISORY PANFL 



The following individuals participated in the Advisory Panel for the 
development of the draft guideline specifications of passive wheelchair lifts, 
active wneelcheir lifts, ramps, and wheelchair securement devices. 

Mr. Tom Bonnell, The Braun Corporation, Winamac, Indiana 

Mr. James Burton, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, Washin:non 

Mr. Dennis Cannon, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 
Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Richard Daubert, Collins Special Products, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Ms. Mary Lou Daily, Metropolitan Fioston Transit Authority, Boston, 
Massachusetts 

Mr. James Elekes, New Jersey Transit. Kaplewood, New Jersey 

Ms. Pat Flinchbaugh, Yorl; Transportation Club, York, Pennsylvania 

Mr. Robert Garside, Regional Transportation District, Denver, Colorado 

Mr. Howard Hall, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, 
Cal if ornia 

Kr. Williajn Henderson, Senior Services of Snohomish County, Everett, 
Washington 

Mr. Jreg R. Hill, General Motors Corporation, F-ontiac, Michigan 

Mr. Steve Holmstrom, Aeroquip Corporation, Jackson, Michigan 

Mr. William Jensen, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento 
Cal if ornia 

Mr. R. Philip Jones, Everest and Jenn'inis, Cajnar 1 1 lo, California 

Ms. Denise Karuth, Governor's Comniission on Accessible Transportation, Boston, 
Massachusetts 

Mr. Paul Kaufman, New Jersey Transit, Maplewood, New Jersey 

Mr. Frank Kirshner, Southern California Rapid Transit District, Los Angeles, 
Cal ifornia 

Mr. John Kordalr.ki, Veterans Administration, Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Kike Kurtz, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 
Washington. D.C. 

Ms. Jan Little, Invt^are Corno-aiior, , Flyria, Ohic 

Ms. Fran Lowder, METRO Cit'ie"-, Aoviscn' Conrnirtee, nrlington, \'irciriic 
Mr. Jeff Ka*";:, General Motors Co-Doraiion, P:-ntiGC, ^ ' Chioan 



Mr. Keith McDowell, American Seating, Grand Rapids, Michigan 

Mr. Donald Meacham, Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, Ohio 

Mr. Austin Morris, Environmental equipment Corporation, San Leandro, 
Cal ifornia 

Mr. Rod Nash, Collins Industries, tlutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Charles Neal , General Motors Corporation, Pontiac, Michigan 

Mr. James No! in. Champion Bus Company, Imlay City, Michigan 

Ms. Sandra Perkins, Washington Metropol it.n Area Transit Authority, 
Washington, D.C. 

Mr. James Reaume, Q-Straint, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada 

Mr. Joe Reyes, Southern California Rapid Transit District, Los Angeles, 
California 

Mr. Larry Sams, Mobile Technology Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Donald Smith, Lift-U-Incorporated, Kent, Washington 

Dr. David Thomas, Transportation Management Associates, Fort Worth, Texas 

Mr. Lance Watt, The Flxible Corporation, Delaware, Ohio 

Mr. Vic Willerws, Mobile Technology Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Chuck Stephens, Lif t-U-Incorporated, Kent, Washington 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Page 

1.0 GENERAL 1 

1.1 Scope 1 

1.2 Definitions 1 

1.3 Abbreviations 2 

1.4 Reference Documents 3 

2.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 3 

2.1 General Requirements :v. 4 

2.2 Structural Requirements 8 

2.3 Power Ramp Requirements 9 

3.0 TESTING, CERTIFICATION, INSPECTION, AND WARRANTIES 12 

3.1 Design Tests 12 

3.2 Acceptance Tests (Optional) 13 

3.3 Ramp Warranty 14 

4.0 MAINTENANCE AND SERVICE 14 

4.1 Documents 14 

4.2 Maintenance and Inspection 14 

4.3 Service 14 



V": 



1.0 GENERAL 



1.1 Scope 

These guideline specifications relate to powered and manual ramps that 
are used by mobility limited persons to assist in boarding public transporta- 
tion vehicles. The safety of passengers using the ramp and reliability of 
operations are of primary concern in these guideline specifications. 



1.2 Definitions 

The following definitions apply for this document. 

Accessible Vehicle - A vehicle that has been equipped to allow boarding 
by passengers who by reason of handicap are physically unable to board a 
vehicle that has not been so equipped. 

dBA - This term denotes decibels with reference to 0.0002 microbar as 
measured on the "A" scale. 

Deploy - The term used to denote the operation of a ramp from a stowed 
position to a position for use. 

Design Load - The maximum weight capacity a ramp is designed to support. 

Elevator Lift - This term denotes the type of lift that has a vertical up 
and down movement as differentiated from an arc lift. 

Factor of Safety (Design Safety Factor) - The factor of safety is the 
ultimate strength of a material divided by the working stress. A struc- 
ture fails or breaks when loaded to its ultimate strength. A structure 
deforms or takes set when loaded to its yield strength. 

Fai 1-saf e - A characteristic of a system and its elements whereby any 
malfunctions affecting safety will cause the system to revert to a known 
safe state. 

Interlock - The arrangement in which the operation or position of one 
mechanism automatically allows or prevents the operation of another. 

Maintenance Personnel Skil". Levels - Maintenance personnel skills used in 
this document are defined in accordance with the White Book specifica- 
tions as follows: 

5M: .Specialist Mechanic or Class A Mechanical Leader 

4M: Journeyman or Class A Mechanic 

3M: Service Mechanic or Class B Serviceman 

2K: Mechanic Helper or Coach Serviceman 

IM: Cleaner, Fueler, Oiler, Hostler, or Shifter 



2 



Hay - This term is to be construed as permissive. 

Paratransit Operation - Paratransit operation refers to a public trans- 
portation operation (service, vehicles, facilities, etc.) that is not a 
transit operation. 

Should - The temi is to be construed as recomnended or strongly recom- 
mended by the Advisory Panel. 

Slip Resistant - A characteristic of a surface of a material that reduces 
unintended relative motion with respect to another surface with which it 
has contact. 

Stow - This term denotes the movement of a ramp from a position of use to 
a position where the ramp is stored and does not interfere with passenger 
movement. 



Structural Components - The structural elementr. of the ramp include those 
ihat support working loads and attach the lift to the vehicle. They do 
not include mechanical and hydraulic components associated with operation 
and control of the ramp. 

Transit Operation - Transit operations refers to a public transportation 
operation (service, vehicles, facilities, etc.) that operates with fi)'.ed 
routes and schedules. 

White Book - This term is the common name for the "Baseline Advanced 
Design Transit Coach Specifications;" originally published by UMTA on 
April 4, 1977, it is now available from the American Public Transit 
Association. 

Wheelchair - A seating arrangement that is positioned on wheels, may be 
powered or unpowered, and can be used to assist mobilitv limited 
individuals. 



1.3 Abbreviations 

The following abbreviations may be found in this document. 

AKSI American National Standards Institute 

ASHE — American Society of Mechanical Engineers 

ASTM — American Society of Testing and Materials 

CSA — Canadian Standards Association 

FKVSS — Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 

NHTSA — National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

SAE — Society of Automotive Engineers 



3 



UMTA — Urban Mass Transportation Administration 
VA — Veterans Administration 



1.4 Reference Documents 

(1) American Public Transit Association. "Baseline Advanced Design 
Transit Coach Specifications," includes Addendums 1 through 20 that 
were made to the April 1977 issue of "Baseline Advanced Design Tran- 
sit Coach Specifications," published by Urban Mass Transportation 
Administration. (Corrmonly known as The White Book). American Pubic 
Transit Association. April 1983. 

(2) Booz, Allen and Hamilton Inc. Boarding Ramps for Transit Buses . 
Prepared for Urban Mass Transportation Administration. Washington, 
D.C. May 1977. 

(3) California Administrative Code, Title 13, Chapter 2, Subchapter /I, 
Article 15. Wheelchair Lifts. 

(4) Canadian Standards Association. "Motor Vehicles for the Transporta- 
tion of Physically Disabled Persons," CAN3-D409-M84. Ontario, Can- 
ada: Rexdale. April 1984. 

(5) Henderson, William H., Dabney, Raymond L., and Thomas, David D. 
Passenger Assistance Techniques: A Training Manual For Vehicle 
Operators of Systems Transporting the Elderly and Handicapped, Third 
Edition . Fort Worth, Texas: Transportation Management Associates. 
1984. 

(6) James D. I. "A Broader Look at Pedestrian Friction." Rubber Chemis- 
try and Technology , Vol. 53, pp. 512-541. 

(7) Society of Automotive Engineers. Standards, Recommended Practices, 
Infomation Reports. 

(8) "Veterans Administration Wheelchair Lift Systems: VA Standard 
Design and Test Criteria for Safety and Quality of Automatic Wheel- 
chair Lift System for Passenger Motor Vehicles." Federal Registe r 
(43 FR 21390). May 17, 1978. 



2.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 

The ramp shall meet the technical requirements given in Section 2.0. 



4 



2.1 General Requirements 



2.1.1 Operating Environment 

The ramp should operate in a temperature range of -10 F to 115 F, at 
relative humidities between 5 percent and 100 percent, and at altitudes 
up to 5,000 feet above sea level. Degradation of performance due to 
atmospheric conditions should be minimized at temperatures below -10 F, 
above 115 F, or at altitudes above 5,000 feet. 

Rationale: The urban areas of the United States have b^'oad rcroes of 
climatic conditions. Weather data indicate that many cities have 
recorded 100 days or more per year of over 90 i temperatures. Likewise, 
many have recorded 20 or more days per year below 0 F. The annual rain- 
fall ranges as nigh as 60 inches per year to a low of 4 inches per year. 
The normal snow and sleet preciDitation in some cities reach 88 inches 
per year. The above guidelines cover a broad range of conditions found 
in the United States end e-e taken from ihe White Ec-ok specifications. 



2.1.2 Operation Constraints 

The ramp should operate when the vehicle is on level ground and up 
to road grades of seven (7) percent or four (4) degrees. 

Rationale: A ramp will be required to operate under a variety of differ- 
ent topographic conditions. A balance needs to be made between the topo- 
graphical c;onditions to be accommodated by a ramp ar:Cj the conditions 
where a ramp will not be required to operate. A seven percent grade 
specif icat" on is currently used by Seattle Metro in its lift procure- 
ments. Since Seattle has a relatively hilly topography, using its limiis 
for road grade seemed reasonable. 

By its very nature a ramo will be able to accommoGite different rjil 
attitudes of a vehicle. The result will oe an increased or decreased 
ramp slope. Section 2.1.7 identifies the maximum ramp slope; and from 
this section local operating policies concerning ramp slope can be devel- 
oped to accommodate vehicle roll. 



2.1.3 Boarding Direction 

A ramp should be capable of handling a wheelchair with tne occupar" 
facing toward or away from the vehicle. 

Rationale: The abiliiy to irianeuver' insioe tne vehicle or at a venicle 
stop may require a person in a wheelchair lo use a ramo ir either direc- 
tion. However, the Advisory -'anel recommends that unaer -ormel operating 
conditions the wheelchair laEsenoer race che vehicle vrz^r] tne attendant 
or c-~iver baci; of the whee^cnai". 



5 



2.1.^ Lo» ation of Ramp 

The tamp should be installed on the side of the vehicle opposite the 
driver's ; eat (n.^commended) at the rear of the vehicle; or on both sides 
of the vef icle. 

Rationale: A ranp could De used in a regular vehicle door or in a sepa- 
rate entrcnce. l"or safety reasons, the preferred location is the curb- 
sice of tl-e vehi(.le. However, in some cases, a rea- entrance may be :re- 
ferred. If a re^r entrance is used, vehicle loaainQ and unloadinc should 
occu" at cff-str(!et location:. In urban envirormcnis with one-way 
streets, having openings on boih sides of a vehicle may be convenient. 



2.1.5 Useful Life 

When used and maintained in accordance with manufacturer's recom- 
mended prccedure!;, the ramo structure should ite designed to have a,- useful 
service life at "east equal to that of the vehicle in which it is 
instdl led. 

Rationale: Once installed the ramp becomes a Dart of the vehicle. A, 
with other subsystems of the vehicle, the ramp with recommended mainte- 
nance (including repair and replacement of mechanical oarts) should b; 
operable as long as the vehicle. The service life of a standar-d tran,it 
bus is 12 to 15 years. The service life of a smaller bus is normally 
less, in tie range of 7 to 10 years, with a van havinc a service life 
typically from 3 to 5 yea-^s. 



2.1.6 Weight 

2.1.6.1 The weight of the ramp should not edv^^^rse^y affec": the 
legal axle loadings, tne maneuverability, or the safe oi.er- 
ation of the vehicle. 

2.1.6.2 The ramp should be able to be deployed and stowed by one 
per son. 

Rationale: For legal and safety reasons the weight of tne ''amp sriould 
not c.dversriy affect the vehicle on whicn it is used. Most t'-arsir oper- 
ations hav ? one cnerator oer vehicle. Wnether tne ramp is powered or 
manjc.l , it should be safely nandled by one person. The use of counter 
balances to ass"^st in manual ooeration may be necessary. 



2.1./ Ram) Slope 

The maximum slope of a ramp for unassisted wheelchair operations or 
ambulatory passengers should be 1 in 12. For assisted operations slopes 
up to 1 in 3 are allowable. 



6 



Rationale: The Canadian Standards Association recommends a maximum g?-a- 
dient of 1 in 4. The Booz, Allen and Hamilton report indicated that the 
1 in 4 slope would be difficult for unassisted wheelchair entry and may 
require assistance for exit. The ANSI architectural standards for longer 
building ramps are slopes no greater th&n 1 in 1?. Assisted operations 
can allow greater slopes. Local operating policies will determine what 
the operable slopes should be. Roof height can limit ramp length and 
make 1t necessary to use slopes up to 1 in 3. 



2.1.8 Ramp Width 

The ramp should have a minimum usable width of 28-1/2 inches. It is 
desired to have a width of 32 inches. 

Rationale: The 2B-l/2-inch width does not preclude existing ramp manu- 
facturers and accommodates approximately 95 percent of the existing 
wheelchair population. The wider ramp would facilitate entry, provide 
more maneuvering room, and accommodate a larger wheelchair population. 



2.1.9 Ramp Surface 



2.1.9.1 Slip Resistant 

The surface of the ramp should be slip resistant for the 
operating environment conditions defined in Section 2.1.1. 

2.1.9.2 Cleats (Optional) 

The ramp may have cheats located to assist an attendant 
using a lift. 

2.1.9.3 Protrusions 

The ramp should have no protrusions and from the surface 
greater than 1/4 inch above the load bearing surface in the 
wheel tracks when deployed for use, except when cleats are 
chosen as an option. 

2.1.9.4 Openings and Gaps 

When the ramp is positioned horizontally any opening or gap 
in the ramp should reject a 3/4-inch diameter metal ball. 



Rationale: The ramp must provide a non-slip surface under wet and winter 
conditions so that the wheelchair wheels will not slip during entry or 
exit. Also, the surface must provide a slip-resistant surface for per- 
sons walking on the ramp. Cleats for attendant assistance are optional 
and should not inhibit the movement of a wheelchair. However, it is 
recognired that cleats could interfere with a three-wheeled mobility eid. 

Movement on and off the ramp should be easy and not inhibited by protru- 
sions. The i/4-inch dimension is consistent with the nrotrusion limits 
specified in the California Adminisi'^at-' ve Code. 



7 



It is des'rable '.o minimize tne gaps or oi.'eninqs in a ramp. The VA spec- 
ification;, whicli require wheelchair lift platforms to ha\e openinas tnat 
meet the ^/4-inch guideline, have been adapted for these qu^uclinc speci- 
fications. 

2.1.10 Rt-mp Thrt!sho1d 

The entryv.aj's of a ramp should have a vertical rise (bump) of 
5/6 inch cr less. 

Rationale: A ser^-es of subjecin'e tests by the VA identified 5/8 incT ss 
a ma<imum allowat'le vertical distance. 



2.1. LI Ramp Bcrriers 

Each side o1 a ramp should have an edge harrier no less than one and 
one-half (1-1/2) inches. A 2-inch barrier is desired. 

Rationale: The Eoo:, A: ".en and Hamilton report recommended 1-1/2-incn 
barriers, c.nd thE Canadian Stancard Association requires a 1- to 2-inch 
height. Tne l-l/'2-inch height "> s the recommended minimum for lifts in 
unassisted operation. The 2-incn height is suggested for al i ramps in 
keeping with the upper limit of CSA. 

2.1.12 Raup Passenger Assists (Optional) 

Ramps shoulC' have handrails to assist wheelchair passengers in t ie 
use of the rajnp. When provided, handrails should be on both sides of the 
ramp, 25 tD 34 irches above the surface of the ramp, l-l/< to 1-1/2 
inches in jiameter or width, and positioned to permit a fLii hand gri i 
with no less thar 1-1/2 inches of knuckle clearance. The r,e,ndrdils 
should be :apable of withstanding a horizontal force of IOC pounds co !- 
centrated it any point. 

Rationale: Tnis section is opiional. The Advisory Panel felt hand:-a 1s 
shoj'c net be recommended when passenger assistance is provided., Hao''- 
rail:, car interfere when drive" or attendant assistance is ::'-ovidec. The 
Advisory Pjne' also does not recommend that ambulatory passengers oe i er- 
mitted to jse a ramc. Howeve^, if c. local operator desires to allow 
ambulatory passengers, handrails snould be used. The Bocz, Allen and 
Hamilton r ^.port recommended the use of hancr^ails. Ihe height and 100 
pound f o^c i requirements ere found in the Canadian ^tancards Associat on 
document. 



2.1.13 Padding end Prci.eci~:ve Coveriric (Optional) 

All exposed edges o" other hazardous protrusions on the stowed rujnp 
or on vehi:le areas asscciatec with tne ramp should be paoded with energy 
abso'"bina iiate^'c"^ to rr'r.imize •^niu*"^' to passenoers. 



8 



Rationale: To ensure safer operations all pcLentially hazardous arear. 
should be protected. Tests have shown that edges and protrusions can be 
especially hazardous in accident situations, lo reduce the potential 
danger, energy absorbing material should be used to protect these areas. 
This guideline is optional because some operators consider the obstru'?- 
tion of vision a greater hazard than exposed edges. 



2.1.14 Securement 

If the ramp is stowed in the passenger compartment, it should be 
securt-d to the vehicle so that it can withstand a horizontal force 
resulting from a 20 g deceleration in a; y direction. 

Rationale: The Cariadian Standardly Association document contains this 
requi renient . Ramps are frequently used on small vehicles, sucn as vans. 
Crash tests have shown tnat pea!' dece 1 e^^at i ons of 21 to 25 g's can be 
experienced in small vehicles. 



2.2 Structurcl Requirements 



2.2.1 Capacity 

The ramp should be designed for a load of 400 pounds distributed 
evenly over a length of 48 inches and the full width of the ramp halfv/ay 
up ' '"le ramp. 

Rationale: The Advisory Panel adopted a 400-pound capacity based on the 
capacity of existing ramps. The market for ramps is very small. Manu- 
facturers indicated that the existing capacity met the market need anc' 
there were no objections by the paratransit and transit operators on the 
Advisory Pmel. 



2.2.2 Structural Safety Factor 

The structural safety factor should be at least three (3) based on 
the ultimate strength of the construction material. 

Rat'ionale: This safety factO'' is in agreement with that used in the 
Ca'ifornia Administrative Code for wneelchair lifts and with good engi- 
neering practices. With this safety factor there should be no bending 
that could procuce permanent def ormat ' on of the ramp at raied load 
caDacitv. 



2.2.3 Katerials 

Ramp structural comoonents should be made of steel or other durable 
cor^.strucrion material. 



9 



2.2.'. .1 Ferrous surfaces should he either [)ldted wiih a protective 
codting or be cleaned and have a corrosion and abrasion 
reiiistant flat protective finish. 

2.2.^.2 Nofiferrous and nonmetallic surfaces should be coated using 
a durable flat or matte finish. 

2. 2. J. 3 Str.inless steel does not req'.;ire coating or surface 
trfatment . 

Rationale: The ramp is to hcv-: a useful lifi.- equal to that cf the veii- 
cle upon v-nich it is mounter.. Kctericls and coatincjs ideniifie: in tiese 
guidelines are ir. tended to ensure th's useful life. Tne ciscussions 
the /\dviscry Panel with regard to rr.oierials included using a sait spr ly 
test or point thickness measurerrier,- \:j erasure compMance. No sr-ecifi; 
test:; c coating methods have been oc'S: i cnc" ed so th;it mtinuf ac. u- '.r-s : in 
continue to use their preferred methods. Tanel memt)ers c:nsi:'e"ed pi ic- 
ing any coatings or surface treatments on sitinless steel unner 'Ssery 



2.2.^1 Interface With Vehicle 

Installatior of the ramp should not reduce or in any way comprom se 
the structural integrity of the vehicle nor cause an imbalance of the 
vehicle that would adversely affect vehicle handling characteristics. 

Rationale: The installation of a ramp in a vehicle mr:y requi>"e some ;;od- 

ification. It is the responsibility of the venicle msnuf actur-t'" 

determine compatibility of his vehi lie's structure"! design wiih the 
selected ramp. 



2.3 Power Ramp Requirements (The following guidelines are for power ramps ) 

2.3.1 War ling Signal s 
2.3.1.1 Sound 

When the ramD is being deployed or stored, an audible warn- 
ing signal of dbA, as measured 5 feet outside the door 
of the vehicle, should be sounded. 

2.3.1 2 Lignts 

When the ramp is being deployed or used, the four-way 
flasher, hazard lights on the vehicle should be automati- 
cal ly opereii no. 

Rationale: The ajdibie vsoTing vr.y\ signal passenger's a: a bus siop "; hat 
a powerec ramp is being deoloyed. The 85 dBA le^'el is a freauently u'. ed 
level for annunc^ : " i^'^s . De^so''' ser oe exposec ~o tnis sound level tor 
long periods o* t withoi,: nearir,: oamage: anc one level is loud enough 
that 't Oc- :■£ "ir- ": above -:-mc' oioiic^ound no'se. 



10 



The four-way flasher, hazard lights will serve as a visual signal 
that the ramp is being deployed or used. Since ramp operation adds to 
the dwell time at a bus stop, the visual signal will alert motorists -^hat 
the bus will be stopped for a longer than usual period. 



2.3.2 Controls 



2.3.2.1 Ramp Control Terminology 

The following ramp control terminology should be used: 

Ramp Authorized or Ramp Power — enables the ramp to deploy 
or stow 

Ramp Out — ramp is commanded to a deployed position 
Ra!..p In — ramp is commanded to a stowed position 

2.3.2.2 Ramp Authorized or Ramp Power Switch 

The ramp authorized or power switch should have two posi- 
tions, on and off. When in the "on" position, the ramp is 
enabled to deploy or stow. When in the "off" position, 
raiTip operation is prevented. 

2.3.2.3 Function Switch 

The function switch or switches for ramp movement should be 
of the momentary type for the ramp out and ramp in commcinds 
so that ramp movement requires constant pressure on the 
switch. The ramp should stop moving when the "ramp out" or 
"ramp in" switch is released. It should not be possible to 
command both the "ramp out" and "ramp in" simultaneously. 

2.3.2.4 Control Location 

The control should be on a pendant or mounted on the vehi- 
cle. The control location shall be such that the operator 
can observe the ramp while using the control. Provision 
shall be made for storage of a pendant control unit when 
not being used by the operator. 



Rationale: The intent is to have a simple control so as to reduce the 
potential of operator error and reduce cost. The general control termi- 
nology and approach is patterned after existing ramps currently supplied 
by a small bus manufacturer. 

The ramp power switch may be a key type to prevent use of the ramp 
by unauthorized persons. The function switch could be a 3-position tog- 
gle switch, spring loaded to return to the center position when released 
or it could be done with two push button switches or ether suitable 
implementation. 



11 



2. 3.;. 5 Interlocks 

2.!!. 2. 5.1 Interlocks ma^ prevent, vehicle movement or pro- 
vide a driver warninq light unless the ramp is 
stowed and the power is off. 

2.3.2.5.2 Interlocks may prevent operation of the ramp 

unless the vehicle is stopped and inhibited from 
moving and the appropriate door is open. 

2. ,'1.2. 5. 3 Interlocks or inherent design features should 
prevent stowing when ramp is occupied. 

Rationale: Inter locf,^ are aesigneo lo prevent urT.ai'e conditions and lam- 
age to the ramp cr vehicle. The f-irst inter locr •,,::> two options. 
Although preventing vehicle movement is recommended, providing an inter- 
lock to prevent movement for small veh"!clet is technically difficult ind, 
therefore, raises the cost. This interlock is easi'ir for vehicles wi :h 
air brakes. At a minimum, a driver warning light i recommended.' 

The second interlock is advisory. Some Advisory Pariel members felt t lat 
this interlock could cause problems in an accident situation. It has 
been made optional, and if used, must be designed with allowance for pos- 
sible lift operation in emergency situations by people not familiar w th 
1 ift detai ■ s . 

The third interlock is recommended. A ramp that cannot be stowed ^^he- 
occupied provides for increased safety in ramp operations. 

2.3.2.6 Manual Operation 

The power ramp should be equipped with a manual override to 
enable the operator to deploy and stov-, the ramp in case of 
power failure. 

Rationale: In the event of power failure a ramp must oe available to 
unlocd pasiengers. Also, the manual operation should allow a ramp to be 
stowed in )rder tD continue vehicle operations. 

2.3.2.7 Wiring 

Wiring should be in accordance with SA.E Recommended Prac- 
tice SAE J129Z OCT 81 and referenced Standards, except v hen 
good engineering practice dictates special conductor 
insjlations. 

Raticnale: This SAE Recommended Practice, "Automobile, Truck, Truck 
Tractor Trc.iler, and Motor Coach k'iring," is accepted by the automotive 
industry and provides a baseline for aesign. The practice recognizes 
that uniqui: design will require engineering practices that cannot be 
envisioned and in:orporated into a recommended oractice. 



12 



3.0 TESTING, CERTIFICATION, IKSPECTION, AND WARRANTIES 



3.1 Design Tests 

The tests defined in Section 3.1 should be performed on a representative 
production model of the ramp procured under this specification. The ramp 
should meet the requirements given in Section 2.0 when attached to a fixture 
that simulates the vehicle installation and when supplied by e power source 
typically available on the vehicle. Only one representative production unit 
is required to be tested for certification, with all tests of Section 3.1 con- 
ducted on the same unit without repairs or maintenance during the tests, o::her 
than that permitted by Section 3.1.2.^. 



3.1.1 Static Load Test (All Romps) 

A static load of 1200 pounds shall be applied through the centre' d 
of a test pallet placed in the center of the ramp when the ramp is posi- 
tioned horizontally at its deployed position. Tne length and width 
dimensions of the test pallet should be 48 inches in length and the fill 
v.'idth of t'le ramp. The load should •"emain on the ramp not less than two 
(2) minute:.. After the load is removed, an inspection should be made to 
determine fractures htve occurred. 

Rationale: Since the design capacity of the ramp is 400 pounds, the 
proof test load was selected to demonstrate that the ramp meets the 
safety fcctor of three thct is recijired. Tnis test could produce perma- 
nent deformation c set c- tne ramp. The test in Section 3.1.1 is an 
adaptation of the VA Wheelcnair Lift Static Load Test. 



3.1.2 Power Operated Ramp Tests 

The tests of Section 3.1.2 should be performed on power operated 
ramps. 

3.1.2.1 Durability Tests 

For a power cDerated ramp, the ramp shouid be deployed and 
stowed for 15,500 cycles. The ambient temDC-eture for tne 
first half of the cycles should be at least 110 F. The 
tests may be contin-jous or separated into groups of not 
less than 10 cycles and may have nonoperating periods of 
not m^ore than one minute be;,ween each cycle in the group. 

Rationale: The above test is cn adaptatiop o'^ the tests required for 
wheelchair lifts in the California Administrative Code. Tne test s 
intended to give an indication of the expected service ";i~e of a ramp. 

3.1.2.2 Self Damage Tests 

The controls shoulc be nelc ir the operating tcsition for- 
five (t) seconcs after tne ram"' meets res'^s'-ance to its 



13 



travel under each control position with any limit switch 
disabled. The tests should be performed twice at each a 
ramp position of deploy and stow. 

Rationale: The test is designed to show tha* the ^amp wil] not damage 
itself or the vehicle when operated with any of the lirrit switches 
failed. The test is an adaptation of the te^ts for wheelchair lifts 
found in the California Administrative Code. 

3.1.2.3 Visual Inspection 

At the conclusion of the tests of powered ramps described 
in Sections 3.1.?.l and 3.1.2.?, with all loads removed, 
the parts of the ramp should show no condition of fractijre, 
permanent deformation, wear that would exceed manufac- 
turer's tolerances, perceptible impairment, or other deter- 
ioration that would be hazardous. 

3.1.2.4 Maintenance During Tests 

During the Durability Test of Section 3.1.2.1, the inspec- 
tion, lubrication, maintenance, and replacement of part'; 
(other than bulbs and fuses) may be performed only as spec- 
ified in the contractor's maintenance manual for the rarnp. 

Rationale: The guidelines given in Sections 3.1.2.3 end 3.1.2.4 are (in 
adaptation of those found in the Califcrnia Administrative Code. 



3.1.3 Certification 

The contractor should provide certification that the ramp procured 
under this specification has been tested as required by Section 3.1 and 
has met all requirements. 

Rationale: This is a standard practice in design testing. 



3.2 Acceptance Tests (Optional) 

The contrac:tor should submit for approval to the Procuring Agency an 
acceptance test plan to demonstrate that the ramps procured by this specifica- 
tion meet the requirements given in Section 2.0. This acceptance test plar, 
at a minimum, should contain tests that demonstrate that the ramp meets the 
safety interlock requirements as given in Section 2.3.2.5. The Procuring 
Agency may witness any or all of these tests. A mutually agreed upon notifi- 
cation time prior to tne start of a test should be made between the two par- 
ties. The test r- suits should be recorded, witnessed, and submitted to the 
Procuring Agency as proof of meeting the acceptance criteria contained in the 
approved test plan. 

Rationale: This section is optional since ramps would normally be pur- 
chased as part c"" a vehicle procurement end ramp acceptance testing would 
be "nc"'.ija£: ip tr-;: \'ehic1e cCceDtance testing. 



14 



THE WARRANTY PROVISIONS AND MAINTENAK'Ct AND SERVICE GUIDELINES THAT FOLLOW ARE 
ADAPTED FROM THE WHITE BOOK SPECIFICATIONS. IF THE RAMP IS PROCURED AS A PART 
OF A VEHICLE SPECIFICATION, THESE SECTIONS MAY NOT BE REQUIRED. 



3.3 Ramp Warranty 

The ramp should be warranted anj guaranteed to be free from defects for 
one (1) year beginning on the date of acceptance of each ramp. The warranty 
should not apply to any part or component of the ramp that has been subjected 
to misuse, negligence, accident, or that has been repaired or altered in a:^y 
way so as to affect adversely its performance or reliability, except insofar 
as such repairs were in accordance with recognized stande>"di of the industry. 
The warranty should not apply to scheduled ma i nt^^nance items, and itenis daio- 
eged as a result of normal wear and tear in service such as floor covcringis 
and pcint. 



^.0 KAIKTEKAKCE AND SERVICE 



4.1 ['rcjn'ents 

The contractor should provide — (*) — current maint^.-iance manual (s)., 
— — current parts manual (s), and — (*; — current operator's manual!;, 
or — (■*■) combination manuals thereof as part of this contract. The con- 
tractor should keep maintenance manuals available fo*" a period of 3 years 
after the date of acceptance of the *-amp procured under this contract. 

(*) Procuring Agency to fill in pertini^nt information. 



4.2 KLintenance and Inspection 

Scheduled naintenance or inspection tasks, as specified by the 
contractor, sha" • require a ckill level of 3^ or less. Scheduled maintenarce 
tasks should be related and should be groupec in n.aximum vehicle mileage 
intervals. Routine scheduled maintenance actions should not be required at 
intervals of le'.is than 6,000 vehicle miles. 



4.3 Service 



4.3.1 Engineering 

The contractor shoulc. at its own expense, have c competent engi- 
neering representati ve(s) availcD"'e on request to assist the Procuring 
Agency's staff in the solution of engineering design problems witnin 
the scope of tnese specif icctions that may arise during the warranty 
perioc. This does not relieve the contractor of responsibilities under 
3ecti'~ 3.5 Wcrrant\' Pro''"^ s ions . 



15 



4.3.? Rer lacement Parts 

The contractor should guarantee the availability of replacement 
parts for ramps procured under this contract for at least a — (*) — 
yesr(s) period alter the date of acceptance. Spare parts should be 
interchanc eable \/ith the original equipment and should be manufactured 
accordance with the same quality assurance as the original part. 

(*) Pertirent iniormation to be filled in by Procuring Agency. 



COhWENTS SHEET 



These guideline specifications are an industry document developed by oro 
fessionals familiar with accessible transportation. The document is consid- 
ered to be an important step in the evolution of accessible transportation. 
However, it is not the final step. It is anticipated that operational experi 
ences and technology advancements will indicate areas where these guidelines 
can be improved. Your comments and suggested changes are solicited. Please 
use this comments sheet to forward your comments to: 

Mr. George Izumi 

Department of Transportation 

Urban Mass Transportation Administration 

Office of Bus and Paratransit Systems/URT-20 

400 7th Street, S.W., Room 6424 

Washington, D.C. 20590 



Comments: (When referring to specific sections of the guideline specifica- 
tions, please identify the section number and title.) 



National Workshop on 
Bus-Wheelchair Accessibility 



Guideline Specifications for 
Wheelchair Securement Devices 



May 7-9, 1986 
Seattle, Washington 

Prepared by 

Battelle Columbus Division 
505 King Avenue 
Columbus, Ohio 43201 
and 

ATE Management & Service Co. 
1911 Fort Myer Drive 
Arlington, Virginia 22209 

Prepared for 

Office of Bus and Paratransit Systems 
Urban Mass Transportation Administration 
Washington, D.C. 20590 



4 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



These guideline specifications are the culmindtion of many hours of hard work 
by persons representing all facets of the accessible transit and paratransit 
industry. The Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UKTA) recognized that 
the technology associated with accessible transportation could be ".mproved 
and sponsored an Advisory Panel in order to develop industry guideline specifi- 
cations. Representing different viewpoints and different interests, the members 
of the Advisory Panel met, discussed issues, and developed these guideline 
specifications. It is a credit to the Advisory Panel and the dedication of 
its members that a formal vote never had to be taken and that the guideline 
SDeci f i cati ons were developed on the basis of consensus. 

Several people need to be acknowledged for the assistance they provided to 
the Advisory Panel in the development of these guidelincL. George 1. Izumi , 
the UMTA Project Manager, was responsible -for planning and orgamzirig the 
Advisory Panel, planning for the Workshop, and contributed greatly to the 
development of the guidelines. Vincent R. DeMarco, the UMTA f^rogram Manager, 
was responsible for guiding tlie efforts of tHe Advisory Panel and for planning 
and conducting the Workshop. Two other persons from i:)t U.S. DeDartment of 
Transportation also provided assistance. Christine Chang of the Trensportati 3n 
Systems Center helped to organize and run the Workshop and prepare Workshop 
Proceedings. Scott York of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administratio'i 
participated in the Advisory Panel meetings and assisted in clarifying certain 
safety issues. The Battel le project team of Gerald A. Francis (consultant), 
Martin Gombert (ATE Management and Service Company, Inc.), Rollar:d D. King, 
ana David M. Norstrom was responsible for developing the dra^t guideline 
specifications and serving as a technical resource to the Acxisoi^y Panel. 
Special recognition is given to Mr. Norstrom who skillfully .lanaged the 
guideline development process and led the discussion: of the Advisory Panel 
meetings that obtained a general consensus of the Advisory Panel on each 
guideline subject. Finally, appreciation goes to each member of the Advisory 
Panel who gave of their time and contributed their expertise to the development 
of these industry guidelines. 



I 



t 



I 



i 



PREFACE 



On September 17, j-98b, the Administrator, Ri'lpti L. jfanlcv, of the Urban Mass 
Transportation Administration called together a moeting with representatives 
of transit agencies, handicapped organizations, rehabilitation specialists 
and manufacturers of buses end v/heel chair lifts to hear first hand the proble^Tis 
and issues regarding transit bus wheelchair accessibility. As a result o-f" 
this meeting, the Administrator requested that ,;n UMTA Advisory Panel be formed 
to plan a National Bus Wheelchair Accessibility Workshop and to guide the 
development of a set of guideline specifications for the equipment required 
for transit bus and paratransit vehicle wheelchair accessibility. A contract 
was issued to Battelle to assist UKTA in this effort. 

As a result of surveying the ti-r.nsit induLt-y "'"or input ^.-.d meetinr with the 
Advisory Panel, Battelle prepared a draft :-,et of guideline specifications for 
wheelchair lifts, securement devices and i~amps for pteseritation and discussion 
fit the National Bus Wheelchair Accessibility Worl;shop held in Scatt.c, 
Washington, on May 7 th-^ough ^^ 1986. Using 'Jic inpi.'ts developed during the 
Workshop and the written comments submitted foriowino the Worl.shop, the 
Advisory Panel prepared these final guideline spec i f i a 1 1 ons . 

These guideline specification: are advisory in nature. The intention of the 
guideline specifications is to provide transit agencies with model that the./ 
could use, as appropriate, in the aevelopment of their specifications for 
wheelchair accessibility. In the guideline specifications, where the word 
"should" is used, the recommendation of the Advisory Panel is that the 
suggested item or value be included in a general specification. Wher-e the 
word "may" is u:-:ed, the Advisory Panel recommends that trie item or choice of 
values be considered for inclusion based upon local operatiro concitions. 
The Advisory Panel has developed these guidelines for use throughout the United 
States. It recognizes that unique local conditions could make an item sugges:e:' 
for inclusion inappropriate and a local public transportation provider would 
be required to make the appropriate changes (e.g. to accommodate extreme 
envi ronmentel condi tions ) . 

Tnis guideline specification is one of four specifications developed by the 
Advisory Panel, which developed separate guideline specifications for passive 
wheelchair lifts (those used primarily on transit buses), active wheelchair 
I'fts (those used pr-imerily on paratransit vehicles), ramps and securement 
cevices. Members of tne Advisory Panel parii ci pated actively in tne develop- 
rent of each individual guideline specification oased upon their experience 
and interest. Altnough the Advisory Panel discussed many relatec accessi bi 1 i ■;y 
issues, these guideline specifications focus only on the technical requi remen';s 
of a specific piece of equipment. They have been prepared to assist in the 
Dui'chase of such equipment either separately or as part of an overall vehicle 
procurement. 



ADVISORY PANEL 



The following individuals participated in the Advisory Panel for the 
development of the draft guideline specifications of passive wheelchair li^'ts, 
active wheelchair lifts, ramps, and wheelchair securement devices. 

Kr. Tom Bonnell, The Braun Corporal "on, Winamac, Indiana 

Mr. James Burton, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, Washington 

Mr. Dennis Cannon, Architectural end I ransportat ion Barriers Complie.ce Borird, 
Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Richard Dcubert, Co H ins Special Prc.-^LCts, Hutchin:.on, KansLS 

Ms. Mary Lou Uuily, Metropolitan Boston "iransit Authority, Boston, 
Massachusetts 

Mr. James Cleker., New Jerse;. Transit, Kaplewood, New Jersey 

Ms. Pat Flinchbaugh, York Transportation Club, York, Pennsylvania 

Mr. Robert Garside, Regional Trcpsportation District, Denver, Colorado 

Mr. Howard Hall, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, 
Cal if ornia 

Mr. William Henderson, Senior Services of Snohomish County, Everett, 
Washington 

M^. Greg R. Hill, General Motors Corporation, Pontiac, Michigan 

Mr. Steve Holmstrom, Aeroquip Corporation, Jackson, Michigan 

Mr. William Jensen, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento 
Cal iforni a 

Mr, R. Philip Jones, Everest and Jennings, Cair,drillo, California 

Ms. Denise Karuth, Governor's Conrrnssion on Accessible Transportation, Boston, 
Massachusetts 

Mr. Paul Kaufman, New Jersey Transit, Kaplewood, New Jersey 

Mr. Frank Kirshner, Sojthern California Rapid Transit District, Los Angeles,, 
Cal iforni a 

Mr. John Kordalski, Veterans Aami ni stration, Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Mike Kurtz, Washington MetroDolitan Area Transit Authority, 
Washington, D.C. 

Ms. Jen Little, Invaca-^e Corpo-ci'ion, Elyria. Ohio 

Ms. Fran Lowder, KETRO Citizen's Acviso^- Conrr.ittee, Arlington, Virginia 
Mr. Jeff Ka^-k, General Motors Cor-poration, Pontiac, Michigan 



Mr. Keith McDo\'ell, Anerican Seating, Grand Rapids, Michigan 

Mr. Donald Meai ham, Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, Ohio 

Mr. Austin Hon is. Environmental Equipment Cor pjration, San Leandro, 
Cat i fornii 

Mr. Rod Nash, (ollins Industries, flutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Char'les Nee 1 , Gen(?ral Motors Corporation, Pontiac, Michigan 

Mr. James Nolir, Champion Bus Company, Imlay City, Michigan 

Ms. Sandra PerMns, Wc.shington Ketropc : i tan Area Transit Authorit\', 
Washingtor , D.C. 

Mr. James Reaunc, Q-Straint, Cambridge. Ontario, Canada 

Mr. Joe R>?yes, Southern California flap k' Tr-^nsit District, Los Annglcs, 
Cal i rorr.i 6 

Mr. Larry Sams, Mobile Technology Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Donald Smith, Lif t-U-Incorporated, Kent, Wasliiru^ton 

Dr. David Thomas, Transportation Management Associates, i-or- Worth, Texas 

Mr. Lance Watt, The Flxible Corporation, Delaware, Ohio 

Mr. Vic Willems, Mobile Technology Corporation, Hutchinson, Kansas 

Mr. Chuck Stephens, Lif t-LJ-Incorporated , Kent, Washington 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Pac[e 

1.0 GENERAL 1 

1.1 Scope 1 

1.2 Definitions 1 

1.3 Abbreviations 2 

1.4 Reference Documents 2 

2.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 3 

2.1 General kequirements 3 

2.2 Securemen.t Process 5 

2.3 Wheelchair Restraint Requirements I. 7 

3.0 OCCUPANT BELT REQUIREMENTS (Optional) 8 

3.1 Occupant Belts 8 

3.2 Force to be Restrained 9 

4.0 TESTING, CERTIFICATION, AND WARRANTIES 9 

4.1 Design Tests 9 

4.2 Acceptance Tests (Optional) 11 

4.3 Warranty 12 

5.0 KAINTENAKCE, TRAINING, AND SERVICE 12 

5.1 Documents 12 

5.2 Maintenance and Inspection 12 

5.3 Replacement Parts 12 

5.4 Training (Optional) 12 



1.0 GENERAL 



1.1 Scope 

These guideline specifications relate to wheelchair securement devices 
that are used on public transportation vehicles. The securement devices are 
designed to accommodate wheelchairs that do not exceed 250 pounds in weight. 
Maximum safety all for passengers and reliable securement device operation are 
of primary concern in these guideline specifications. 



1.2 Definitions 

The following definitions apply for this documc?nt. 

Accessible Vehicle - A vehicle that has been equipped to allow boarding 
by passengers who by reason of handicap are physically unable to 'board 
the vehicle that has not been so equipped. 

Active Lift - An active lift is one that when stowed may interfere with 
the use of the vehicle entrance where the lift is located and that when 
being raised or lowered operates primarily outside the body of the 
vehicle. 

Fail-safe - A characteristic of a system and its elements whereby any 
malfunction affecting safety will cause the system to revert to a knovvn 
safe state. 

Interlock - The arrangement in which the operation or position of one 
mechanism automatically allows or prevents the operation of another. 

Lift or Wheelchair Lift - A level change device used to assist those with 
limited mobility in the use of transit and paratransit services. The 
term lift and wheelchair lift are used interchangeably in this document. 

Maintenance Personnel Skill Levels - Maintenance personnel skills used in 
this document are defined in accordance with the White Book specifica- 
tions as follows: 

5K: Specialist Mechanic or Class A Mechanic Leader 

4K: Journeyman or Class A Mechanic 

3M: Service Mechanic or Class B Serviceman 

2M: Mechanic Helper or Coach Serviceman 

IK: Cleaner, Fueler, Oiler, Hostler, or Shifter. 

May - This term is to be construed as permissive. 

Paratransit Operation - Paratransit operation refers to a public trans- 
portation operation (service, vehicles, facilities, etc.) that is not a 
transit operation. 



1 



Should - The tenn is to be construed as reconmended by the Advisory 
Panel. 

Transit Operation - Transit operation refers to a public transportation 
operation (service, vehicles, facilities, etc.) that operates with fixed 
routes and schedules. 

White Book - This term is the corrmon name for "Baseline Advance Design 
Transit Coach Specifications," originally published by UMTA on April 4, 
1977. It is now available from the American Public Transit Association. 

Wheelchair - A seating arrangement that is positioned on wheels, may be 
powered or unpowered, and can be used to assist mobility limited 
individual s. 

Wheelchair Securement Device - A device anchored to a vehicle and used to 
limit the movement of a wheelchair when the vehicle is in motion. • 



1.3 Abbreviations 

The following abbreviations may be found in the guidelines. 

ANSI — American National Standards Institute 
ASME — American Society of Mechanical Engineers 
CSA — Canadian Standards Association 
FMVSS — Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 
GVWR — Gross Vehicle Weight Rating 

NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

SAE — Society of Automotive Engineers 
UPAS — Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards 
UKTA — Urban Mass Transportation Administration 
VA — Veterans Administration 



1.4 Reference Documents 

(1) American Public Transit Association. "Baseline Advanced Design 
Transit Coach Specifications," includes Addendums 1 through 20 that 
were made to the April 1977 issue of "Baseline Advanced Design 
Transit Coach Specifications," published by Urban Mass Transporta- 
tion Administration. (Conmonly known as The White Book.) American 
Public Transit Association. April 1983. 

(2) California Administrative Code, Title 13, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4, 
Article 15. Wheelchair Lifts. 



3 



(3) Canadian Standards Association. "Kotor v:^i;icles for the Transpor- 
tation of Physically Disabled Persons," CAN3-I)409-K84. Ontario, 
Canada: Rexdale. April 19B4. 

(4) Canyon Research Group, Inc. "A Requirements Analysis Document ^or 
Transit Vehicle Wheelchair Lift Devices." Prepared for Urban Mass 
Transportation Administration, Westlakc Villegc, California. June 
1978. 

(5) Doag, Virginia S. and Smith, Robert K. (California Department of 
Transportation). Wheelchair Securemgnt on Bus and Paratransit 
Vehicles . Prepared for Urban Kass Transportation Administration, 
Sacramento, California, ju~\y 1981. 

(6) "Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard," Code of federal Regula- 
tions , Title 49, Part 571 Kc. 2^07, Seating Systems, and No. 210,' 
Seat Belt Assembly Anchorages. 

(7) Henderson, Williairi H., Dabney, Raymond L., and Thomas, David D. 
Passenger Assistance Techniques: A TroininQ Manual For Vehicle 
Operators of Systems Transporting the Elderly and Handicapped, 
Third Edition . Fort Worth, Tox:.: TranLportat lon Kanaqement Ar.so- 
ciates. 1984. 

(8) "Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards.'' Federal Register 
(49FR31528). August 7, 1984. 

(9) "Veterans Administration Wheelchair Lift Systems: VA Standard 
Design and Test Criteria for Safety and Quality of Automatic Whe;el- 
chair Lift System for Passenger Motor Vehicles." Federal Register 
(43FR21390). May 17, 1978. 

(10) "Wheelchair Securement Systems in Transit Vehicles: A Summary 
Report." Sunniary proceedings of the National Workshop on Wheel- 
chair Securement in Transit Vehicles of December 7-10, 1980. 



2.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 



2.1 General Requirements 



2.1.1 Useful Life 

When used and maintained in accordance with manufacturer recom- 
mended procedures, a vneelchair securement device should be designed to 
have a useful life equcl to the useful life of the vehicle on which it is 
used. 

Rationale: The securement systen; !Ti:\> be bs'ts, clainDs, lock-Din devices, 
or a comtinatior thereof. Once installeo the syster Decomes a part o' 



4 



the vehicle. As with other components of the vehicle, with normal main- 
tenance, including repair and replacement of parts, and proper use, the 
securement device should last as long es the vehicle. Normal maintenance 
should include replacement of belts and other parts subject to wear and 
damage (e.g., the severe stretching of belts in an accident), and should 
be replaced as recommended by manufacturers. 

Useful life of a standard size transit bus is 12 years. Smaller 
vehicles have shorter useful lives. For example, a converted van used 
for public transportation typically has a useful life of 3 to 5 years. 



2.1.2 Wheelchair to be Accommodated 

The contractor should provide inforriiation on the dimensions and 
characteristics of wheelchairs that can be acconmodaLtid by the securenent 
system. 

Rationale: Existing securement systems have a trade-off between the time 
and convenience of securement and tne wheelchairs that can be accommo- 
dated. The contractor should identify the wheelchair characteristics and 
dimensions that can be secured in order for the system operator to de:>ign 
appropriate operating policies. (For examp't, wheelchairs with small., 
solid tires may not be accommodated by a clamp system.) 



2.1.3 Wheelchair Orientation 

The selection of wheelchair orientation in a transit vehicle 
involves the consideration of safety, capacity, ride comfort, and vehicle 
interior fdctors. The order of preference for wheelchair orientation for 
passenger '.;afety in transit vehicles is: 

(1) Rearward facing with padded head and back support 

(2) Forv'ard facing 

(3) Rearward facing without support 

(4) Side facing of the wneelchair with padded support to prevent 
motion to*?"ard the front of the vehicle 

(5) Side facing without support 

The procuring agency should specify wheelchair orientation based on their con- 
sideration of the above f actors . 

Rationale: Tests simulating a frontc' crash have indicated that the saf- 
est orientation is rearwe^d facing coupled with padded nead and back sup- 
port. The next safest is forward facing. Less safe is rear facing 
wiinout support and siae facing with a barrier next to the wheelchair. 
Least safe is side facing with no barrier. 

The Advisory Panel was able to reach consensus es to recommenaed 
wheelchair orientation for siandaro size transit vehicles (Gross Vehicle 
Weight Rating [GVWR] greate- tnan 30,000 pouncs). For those class of 



5 



vehicles the forward facing was preferred with a recirv.ard facing as a 
second choice. 

The Advisory Panel was not able to reach consensus as to recommended 
wheelchair orientation for smaller s^:e transit vehicles. However, they 
were in agreement as to the rank witii respf'r* to safety. 

In smaller vehicles, limiting wheelchair securemeni to a forward or 
rearward facing position poses problems in '.erms of reducing the capa:ity 
of the vehicle to accommodate wheelchairs. Discussions among the Advi- 
sory Panel showed a divergence of opinion between safety and capacity 
considerations. Accident data in icate that aprroximately 60 percent of 
occupant injury accidents are I'rontcl. Forward facing or rearwc'd faring 
with barriers are safer or i e rite.: i c^v 'her' side ""acinc in frontal ccci- 
dents. With 40 percent of the occji^ani ir.jury accidents being siue, 
rear, or other impact locations ano /xiiN sioe facing orientation pro- 
viding more wheelchair loading capacity, operators face a trade-off 
between capacity and potential accident impact. , for operators cT sm.ill 
vehicles, a local decision will neeo to be mane concerning orientation 
and capacity. By analyzing its needs and its .ccc'dent nistorj, a local 
operator should choose an orientation that oest meets the local condi- 
tions and needs. 



2.1.4 Storage 

When not being used for securement, the securement devices should be 
located or stored in a manner that does not interfe^^^- witn passenger 
movement; does not present protrusions, obstacles, or ctner conditionf; 
that would be hazardous in nonnal operations or a crdsh environment; s 
reasonably protected from vandalism; and can be reLGi'iy accessed when 
needed for use- 
Rationale: A securement system should not introduce any hazarjcu: coridi- 
tions into a vehicle. By ensuring that the securement system ;s located 
or stored in a manner ihat will not interfere wiih passenger movement, 
hazardous conditions are minimized. 

Transit systems report rhai vandalism is a problem that impairs the 
operation of a securement system. Although vc;'-,dalism cannot be totally 
prevented, the securement system should be designed and located in a 
manner that will minimize vandalism. This guideline also applies wher 
occupant restraint belts are specii'ied. 



2.2 Securement P-ccess 



2.2.1 Engaging and Releasing Wheelchair 

The wnee'ichcir securement oevice shoulc secure a v/heelchsir when it 
is proper~3' positioir-d. Trie secu'^ement oeN'ice snoclo oe I) activated oy 



6 



a mechanism of the securement device when contacted by a wheelchair and 
released by either passenger or second party action, and/or (2) conve- 
niently engaged and released by a person familiar with the operation of 
the securement device. 



1.1.2. Time for Securement 

The securement should be able to be engaged or released by a person 
familiar with the use of the securement device in no more than 
— (*) — minutes. 

(*) To be completed by Procuring Agency. 

Rationale: The securement system might be mechanical devices, belts, or 
a combination of the two. Existing securement devices can oe activated 
in the positioning process (e.g., certain clamp devices), requ i re ,5ss i s- 
tance in engaging and releasing (e.g., lock-pin devices), or are combi- 
nation systems requiring both (e.g. a combination clamp and belt syste^n). 

In Section 2.2.1 the first activation process may require involve- 
ment by more than a wheelchair passenger in the process while the second 
process will require second party involvement. 

In discussing the securement process, the Advisory Panel debated '".he 
role of the driver. For paratr-ansit services the driver should be 
involved in the secur^ement process and verify securement. For fixed 
route operations, opinions varied. Some members considered that the 
driver should be involved in the securement process and verify secure- 
ment. Others considered the driver role lo be passive. Proper secu'-e-- 
ment would be left to the passenger. The role of tr^e driver is a loca' 
operatir.g policy decision; and the specification allov/s an optional 
driver role. As noted aDOve, a device that can be 'conveniently encaged 
and released by a person familiar w-"th the operation of the securement 
device" may require driver or a thir-d party familiar with the securement 
device operition. 

The time of securement is a soeci f i cat i on that is to be completea by 
the local operator based on tne characteristics of the service being pro- 
vided. Fc fixed route service, the Aavisory Panel considered the 
securement engaging or release process should take a minimum amount of 
time. Less than 1 minute and less than 2 minutes were both discussed. 
In no case should the time exceed 5 minutes, '^or paratransit service no 
consensus could be reached on l desirat'e time. The time of securement 
is dependent on the type of oevice usee, ooerating cciditions, and the 
type of whee'cnair oeino secu-ed. When i^'ng this specification the 
operator may wish tc designcte the whee 1 c-,-: i r types to bt secured w'thin 
the specified time or establish an upper time limit. 



7 



2.3 Wheelchair Restraint Requirements 



2.3.1 Force To Be Restrained 

2.3J.1 The wheelchair securenient system used on vehicles with 

GVWRs of 30,000 pounds or above should be designed to with- 
stand a force in a forwa-^d longitudinal direction of up to 
2,000 pounds per tiedown leg or clamping mechanism and a 
minimum of 4,000 pounds total for each wheelchair. 

2.3.1.2 The wheelchair securement system used on vehicles with 
GVWRs of up to 30,000 pounds should restrain up to 
2,500 pounds per tiedown leg or clamping mechanism and a 
minimum of 5,000 pounds total for each wheelchair. 

Rationale: Crash tests have shown the loilowing: 

(a) Small scnool buses crashed ai 30 n;ph experienced peak decelera- 
tions of 21-25g's 

(b) Large school buses crashed at 21 mph experie^Med peal; decelt^ra- 
tions of 12-15g ' s 

(c) Transit buses crashed at 21 mph experienced peak decelerations 
of 8-lOg's. 

The force values given in this guideline section were selected by 
the Advisory Panel on the basis of the test data end recogn'tion that 
paratransit vehicles are small relative to standard transit buses and can 
be expected to operate at a higher average speed. 

The requirement of lower wheelchair restraining forces for vehic'-es 
with GVWRs of 30,000 pounds or more is based on recognition that virtu- 
ally all advanced design transit Dases over 30 feei in length have GVWRs 
over 30,000 pounds. The higher wheelchair restraining forces v.ere con- 
sidered appropriate to all vehicles with lower GVWRs. 



2.3.2 Attachment to Vehicle 

2.3.2.1 On vehicles with a rated GVk'Rs of 30,000 pounds or more, the 
attachments to the vehicle snould restrain a force in the 
forward longitudinal direction of up to 2,000 pounds per 
attachment point and a minimum of 4,000 pounds total for 
wheelchair securement system. 

2.3.2.2 On vehicles with GVWRs of less than 30,000 po'.mds, the 
attachiTients to the vehicle should restrain a force in the 
forward longitudinal direction up to 2,500 pounds per 
attachmeni point and a minimum of 5,000 pourids total for 
the wheelchair securement system. 



8 



Rationale: The force to be restrained by the attachment to the vehicle 
is designated the same as the force to be restrained by the wheelchair 
securement system (Section 2.3.1) in order to ensure overall integrity in 
the system. 

2.3.3 Nominal Movement in Normal Operations 

Each securement location within a vehicle should be designed to 
limit movement of an occupied wheelchair when the vehicle is in normal 
operation and should meet the requirements of Section 4.1.2. 

Rationale: Limiting wheelchair movement during normal operation provides 
a more comfortable ride for the wheelchair passenger and reduces the risk 
of a moving wheelchai'* injuring another passenger. Note that nominal 
movement will most likely require self-locking securement for belts and 
prohibit the use of inertial securement on belts. 



3.0 OCCUPANT BELT REQUIREMENTS (Optional) 



3.1 Occupant Belts 

Separate from the wheelchair securement system, an occupant securement 
system consisting of (1) a lap belt or IZ) a lap and shoulder belt should be 
provided. The lap belt should be a minim.um of 85 inches in length. For lap 
and shoulder belt combination, the shoulder belt should be a minimum 85 inches 
in length and the second belt should be a minimum A3 inches in length. The 
occupant belt system should comply with Section 2.1.4. 

Rationale: The question of occupant securement generated divergent opinions 
among the Advisory Panel. Occupant securement is not required on public 
transportation vehicles. Some thought that no special consideration should be 
made for those in wheelchairs. Yci, the Southern California Rapid Transit 
District has documented that whetichair patrons have an acciasnt rate over 350 
times greater than ambulatory passengers. 

As describee earlier in the raticncie of Section 2.3.1, the forces pres- 
ent in a crash vary by type of vehicle. Operato'-s of small venicles generally 
favored occupant securement. Belt systems are o'ten used in paratransit oper- 
ations; and occupant securement belts would not add significantly to the time 
of Doarding. Given the divergence, the Advisory Panel considered occupant 
securement a local issue and made this section optional. 

Differences of opinion also existed in terms c' only a lap belt or e. lap 
and shoulder be;: combination. Again, the differences partially related to 
vehicle size. On larger transit buses, finding attachment points for shoulaer 
belts is difficult. On smaller vehicles, especially vans, the problem of 
attachment is not considered as difficuit. 



9 



Although self-locking securenienL for bells fo>' wrieelchairs may result 
from the nominal movement requirements, inertial locking systems should be 
acceptable for passenger use. Such belts could allow passenger movement in a 
wheelchair. The 86-inch length is currently in use in the industry. Longer 
lengths have caused both procurement and certification problems. 

3.2 Force to be Restrained 

The occupant securement system and anchorages should comply with 
FMVSS 209 and FKVSS 210. respectively. 

Rationale: Both the belt assembly en;; anrhorage sfiould t-e designed and tested 
to FMVSS. These standards for seat bc'ts o'-;- ccrenteri in trie rutomotive 
industry. Since FMVSS is to be met, no G,:c'itionoi lest procedures are 
described ^'n Section A.Q. 



4.0 TESTING. CERTIFICATIOK. AKD WARRAKiIlS 



4.1 Design Tests 

The tests defined in Section 4.1 should be performed on a rep-esenteti ve 
production unit of the securement device model procured under this specifi- 
cation. The securement device should meet the requiremenis given in Section 
2.0 when attached to a fixture that simulates a bus instcllaiion. Only one 
representative production unit is required to be tested for certification. 



4.1.1 Wheelchair Securement Device and Attachment Resiraint Test 

Once engaged the securement aevice and atidchmsnt lo tne vehicle 
should not fdil when the device is subjected to the loads described in 
Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 for 10 seconds under the following conditions: 

(1) For clamps and similar systems: 

The force is applied at the height at which the securement 
device is mounted or cirtached to a wheelchair. 

(2) For belt systems: 

The force is appliec horizontally at the end of the belt wheii 
belts are in conformance with the manufacturer's recommended 
installation and secu-^ement procedures. 



Permanent deformatijn o"" rupru'-e o' the restraint or anchorage is 
not conside"ed a failure if the recL'rec force is sustained for 
10 seconds. 

Rationale: Tr.is lesi is oesignec Ddsec Dr. me requirements of Sec- 
tions 2.3. J and 2.3.2, 6';' concur>-en: 'y lests DOin resfcini and the 
attacnmeni tne ^'enicl-. 1': !~e:oc:- les me c '', ' " er~erice ''eiween me 



10 



clamp and belt systems. The clamp systems will be tested at their height 
of mounting or when the clamp is adjustable at the height of attachment 
to a wheelchair (usually 10 inches to ]R inches sbove the floor). The 
belt systems will be tested when bei:s are in conformance with the man- 
ufacturer's recommended installation and securement p'-ocedures. The def- 
inition of failure used in this guideline is similar to that used in 
FMVSS 210. 

Note that the language in Section 4.1 does not mean that a manu- 
facturer must perform ihese tests for each procurement. Once a secure- 
ment device model and vehicle ni-'iiel combination have been tested, the 
design test applies to all proc.'rements of this combination of models, 

^..1.2 Kominal Movement Test 

The contractor sho'jld test the ability of the securement devite to 
maintain nominal rrvovement. One or more of the following wheelchairs 
should be used in this test: 

d standard manual wheelchai- (e.g., an Everest and Jennings 
Traveller model or equivalent) 

a standard powered wheelchair (e.g., an Invacare Power Rolls 
Arrow Model 4H929E or equivalent) 

a modular powered wheelchair (e.g., a Fortress Scientific 655 
or equivalent) . 

When the wheelchair is loaded with a restrained weight of 110 and 
250 pounds, it should not move more tnan 4 inches in any direction at any 
point of contact with the floor when the vehicle is being operated under 
the following conditions: 

(a) Full throttle acceleration on dry pavement from a standstill to 
25 mph with the vehicle at its curb weight plus one occupied 
wheelchair. 

(b) Maximum braking from 22 mph to a standstill on dry pavement 
with the vehicle at its curb weight plus one occupied wheel- 
chair. 

(c) Driving both clockwise and counterclockwise with the outer 
front wheel around one of the following: 

(1) 50 ft diameter circle at a minimum steady speed of 
12 mph 

(ii) 75 ft diameter circle at a minimum steady speed of 
14 mph 

(iii) I'JO ft diameter circle at a minimum steady speed 
of 15 mph. 



11 



Use of the securement device during normal bus operdtion should not cause 
damage to the wheelchair being transported. 

Rationale: This section is adapted from the Canadian Standards Associ- 
ation. The 4-inch movement was recommended by the Advisory Panel, which 
considered the CSA 3/8-inch standard too restrictive, especially with 
regard to clamp systems. The vehicle circular operating tests all gener- 
ate 0.35 to 0.39 gs of lateral force. The circle to be operated will 
depend on the size and manueverabi 1 ity of the vehicle. 



4.1.3 Visual Inspection 

At the conclusion of the tests described in Section A. 1.2, the 
securement device and components for attachment to the vehicle should 
show no condition of fracture, wear that would exceed manufacturer's 
tolerances, perceptible impairment, or other deterioration. 

Rationale: The tests in Section 4.1.2 involve loads well below those 
applied in Section 4.1.1 and these tests should not reduce the capacity 
of the system to restrain loads. 



4.1.4 Certification 

The contractor should provide written certification of compliance of 
the tests in Section 4.1. 

Rationale: Section 4.1.4 is standard practice in de:>1gn testing. 



4.2 Acceptance Tests (Optional) 

The contractor should submit for approval to the Procuring Agency a test 
plan to demonstrate that the securement devices purchased by this procurement 
meet the requirements in Section 2.0. The Procuring Agency may witness any or 
all of these acceptance tests. A mutually agreed upon notification time prior 
to the conduct of a test should be made between the two parties. The test 
results should be recorded, witnessed (i.e., signed), and submitted to the 
Procuring Agency as proof of meeting the acceptance criteria of the approved 
test plan. 

Rationale: Acceptance tests are standard industry practice in vehicle pro- 
curement. It is anticipated that acceotance testing will primarily concern 
the requirements of Seciions 2.2 and 2.3.2. For small procurements the Pro- 
curing Agency could choose to accept test data from other procurements of the 
same vehicle and securement device. this reason the acceptance test 

requirement is optional based on the size of the procurement. 



4.3 Warranty 

A SLatement of warranty should be provided with each securement device 
assuring the quality of materials and workmanship of the product for at leiist 
one (1) year from the date of delivery to the final consumer. 

Rationale: When securing accessible equipment, the above is stendard prac'.iice 
in the industry. 

THE KAINTENANCE. TRAINING. AND SERVICE GUIDELINES THAT FOLLOW ARE ADAPTED EROM 
WHITE BOOK SPECIFICATIONS. IF WHEELCHAIR SECUREKfKT DEVICES ARE PROCURED /.S A 
PART OF A VEHICLE SPECIFICATION, THESF SECTIONS P^Y NOT [!E REQUIRED. 



5.0 KAIKTENANCE, TRAINING, AND SERVICE 



5.1 Documents 

The contractor should provide — (*) — current maintenance manual (s)., 
— (*) — current parts manual (s), and — (■*"} — operator's manual (s) or 
— {*) — combination manuals thereof as part of this contract. The con- 
tractor should keep maintenance manuals c-vailable for a period of 3 years 
after the date of acceptance of the securement device procured under this 
contract. 

(*■) Procuring Agency to fill in pertinent information. 



5.2 Maintenance and Inspection 

Scheduled maintenance or inspection tasks as specified by the contractor 
should require a skill level of 3K or less. Scheduled maintenance tasks 
should be related and should be grouped in maximum bus mileage or time 
intervals. 



5.3 Replacen>ent Parts 

The contractor should guarantee the availability of replacement parts for 
securement devices procured under this contract for at least the useful life 
of the securenvent device. Spare parts should be interchangeable with the 
original equipmc^nt and should be manufactured in accordance with the auality 
assurance p'-ovisions of this contract. 



5.4 Training (Optional) 

The contractor should have at least one Qualified irstructor who should 

be available at the Procuring Agency's orooerty for — (*) calendar days 

between the hours of — (*) and — (j^) after acceptance of the first 

securement device. Instructor ( s ) shoulc conauct classes and advise the 



13 



personnel of the Procuring Agency on the proper operation and maintenance of 
the securement device. The contractor should also provide visual and other 
teaching aids for use by the Procuring Agency's own training staff. 

(*) Procuring Agency to fill in pertinent information. 

Rationale: For small procurements this type of trflining would be expensivi? 
and excessive. This section is, therefore, optional. For small procuremeiits 
the contractor should be requested to provide brief instructions on securement 
device use at the time of vehicle delivery, and to be available for consul- 
tation on an as-needed basis. 



COHWrNTS SHtET 



These guideline specifications are an industry document developed by :ro 
fessionals familiar with accessible transportation. The aocument is consi j- 
ered to be an important step in the evolution of accessible iransportat i on . 
However, it is not the final step. It is anticipated that operational exp^eri 
ences and technology advancements will indicate areas where these guidelines 
can be improved. Your comments and suggested changes are solicited. Please 
use tnis comments sheet to forward your comments to: 

Mr. George Izumi 

Department of Transportation 

Urban Mass Transportation Admi ni st- Gt i on 

Office of Bus and Paratransit Systems/UF T-?0 

400 7th Street, S.W., Room 6424 

Washington, D.C. 20590 



Comments: (When referring to specific sections of the guideline specifica- 
tions, pledse identify the section nur,Der and title.) 



DOT LIBRAR^Y 

00399736